The Prototyping Benefits of a Zero-Sum Game

If you are designing a game where points or other resource quantities are involved, you may have realized the line you have to balance when prototyping it.  To save money, you may have printed/bought/gathered less tokens than you thought you needed and had to decide what happens when your playtesters ran out.  Was that an intentional part of the game?  How many tokens are the right amount?  Should you just print way too many and not let the players run out (which of course will be more expensive to prototype and ultimately make if you decide to sell it with too many tokens)?

One solution is to eliminate the bank entirely and divide the resources up at the start of the game.  Then players give and take resources from each other.  This is what is known as a zero-sum game because there is no total loss or gain of resources.  This has a number of benefits: it's much easier to figure out how many tokens the game will need so players generally have just enough or just shy of enough most of the game (depending on what you're going for), players end up balancing the game themselves by (usually) taking from the person winning and helping out people in last place (which is an interesting additional strategic choice for your players), and this dynamic balance should help people from getting an insurmountable lead from the other players.

Zero-Sum resources will drastically alter your game, though.  Imagine if the resources in Settler's of Catan didn't come from a bank of cards, but instead when you bought a road, you had to decide who would get your wood and clay.  That would shift the focus from trading resources directly (simple and intuitive) to bargaining for future resources (e.g. "I will give you this clay now if I get your ore when you buy a development card").  One of the biggest draws of Settler's of Catan is that it's very easy to learn and it's a big social game.  However, while resource trading is a positive thing (both parties get something they want), resource bargaining can be pretty negative (it's essentially begging and what happens if one person doesn't keep their end of the bargain?).

So as always, keep in mind what your goal is with the game and what you want your players to feel.  If your game is directly competitive (players should attack each other) and you're finding all your playtesters playing too nicely, then a zero-sum situation will help force them to attack each other since they have to take their resources/points/whatever from another player and start aggression.  If your game is meant to make or keep friendships alive, maybe this isn't the right thing for your game.