The initial inspiration for me to make board games was the idea of looking down on a world where the players are like gods controlling the lives of the 'pieces' or 'men'. This came about because I was making map-like paintings and drawings from an overhead viewpoint at the time.

What I soon realised is that the players do not just control the actions of the 'pieces'; they actually identify with them, so that the pieces become a representation of the players. Most players willingly suspend disbelief and play in earnest. They want to win at all costs and will enthusiastically engage in morally dubious actions in play in order to do so. One of my early games, Board Game, requires players to kill or be killed by their neighbours; players do not hesitate to kill. Even when players are represented by pieces that they do not sympathise with (such as the axemen in Trees versus Axemen), they still play to win.

Board games seem to bypass the intellect; they engage people directly at an emotional level. I use games to highlight moral, ethical and social problems, while not suggesting solutions. Players are not invited to make up their minds; instead they have to live with the choices that they make or cope with the events thrust upon them. Players engage in behaviours, cope with situations, and fight for their positions and the 'lives' they acquire through chance and strategy, and they do so - for the most part - intensely, seriously and whole-heartedly.

So for me an important element of the player's experience is that they are placed in an ethically questionable situation. The themes of my games are issues such as theft, debt, migration, death, deforestation, war, and discrimination.

However, it is also essential that the games are fun, playable, and sociable.

The games can be fun in a number of ways. The pieces and board need to be appealing and nice to handle. Players need to be active as much of the time as possible, not sitting for too long watching others make moves; in Whirlpools and Lifebelts all the players are in play all the time. An artist game needs to be different from commercially available games, so that the experience is new. The game mustn't drag on beyond the time when people want to stop playing.

More importantly, the game must provide some kind of satisfaction and entertainment. Satisfaction may perhaps arise from achieving a collection (as in Gravestones and Dry Bones), or a sense of completion (as in Hitched when all the pieces have returned home). Games of skill, such as Hitched and Trees versus Axemen, can provide intellectual satisfaction. Entertainment might arise from comic elements (such as the instructions on cards in Tulip Birds and Daffodil Birds), or from a situation (such as being sent repeatedly back into a shop in I've brought you back a baby dragon). The particular combination of entertainment and satisfaction will vary from game to game, but a game without satisfaction and entertainment will fall flat.

Games must be playable. The rules must make sense, and be clearly and unambiguously explained in the rules leaflet. It is helpful to players if games follow at least some of the accepted conventions of board games. A game should generally be fair, with every player starting from the same position, and having the same chance of winning a game of chance, or of learning to win a game of skill. There must be a clear endpoint.

Most board games are inherently sociable in that players discuss rules and comment on moves and outcomes.

I like to add the possibility of conversation arising from the moral and ethical issues; players often comment on their own and each other's actions: 'You always were such a spendthrift' in Shopping Spree; 'I can't believe you've stolen my last body' in Gravestones and Dry Bones; 'I don't want to kill you but I have to' in Board Game; and 'I'm desperate to get back home' in I've brought you back a baby dragon. Trees versus Axemen involves players operating in teams of two, and so requires them to discuss moves.

The rules must 'work' and be clearly explained. I create a prototype and play the game with friends and family to iron out problems and ensure that the game lasts for the right length of time. Sometimes it is necessary to do the maths, as with calculating the risk of certain positions in Danger Money. It may be necessary to adjust the design of the board, change the number of dice or cards in use, or alter the rules, until the game works in a way that is satisfying and feels right. It is hard to be scientific about this as the best timing and complexity vary with the nature of the game.

The length of the game needs to suit both the type of game - how long it can sustain the interest of the players - and the context in which it is being played, such as the venue and circumstances.

Given the context in which my games are usually played - probably only once, and by visitors who may not be games enthusiasts - it is best if the games are relatively short (up to about 20 minutes, but preferably about 10 minutes) and not too complex.

Whirlpools and Lifebelts is a very fast game, essentially a race in which all players are in action all the time, and it has to be quite short (approximately 3-5 minutes) as it would be impossible to maintain that intensity over a longer period. However, I've brought you back a baby dragon is intended to be a relatively slow game in which players become a little frustrated so that they stop competing and co-operate in order to bring the game to an end. Hitched is a game of skill that can keep people involved for 10-15 minutes.

There needs to be a clear point at which the game finishes. With some of my games there is a clear winner (Hitched, Trees versus Axemen, Gravestones and Dry Bones, Vegetable Thieves, and Danger Money).

If players are eliminated one by one (Shopping Spree and Tulip Birds and Daffodil Birds), this should not drag on; however, it can provide the players with an individual outcome - in debt or solvent in Shopping Spree, and with a life that was long/short, rich/poor, happy/sad in Tulip Birds and Daffodil Birds.

It can be nice if there is a surprise at the end (as with Shopping Spree).

With some of my games, there is no clear winner. It is hard to argue that anyone wins at the end of Whirlpools and Lifebelts; there are twenty people trying to escape their war-torn homelands, but only seven places on the Island of Safety. The others all die, and so it is very unlikely that any family of five will have survived intact. Likewise with Board Game, it is unlikely that anyone's family with survive in its entirety.

With I've brought you back a baby dragon, players may co-operate to end the game, so that it doesn't matter who technically wins.

In designing a game, there are a number of basic decisions to be made. One is the number of players, and most of my games are for four (or three), although one is for two (Hitched).

Another decision concerns chance, choice and skill. One of my games is purely chance (Shopping Spree), which adds to a sense of powerlessness. One is purely skill (Hitched). Some contain elements of both chance and skill. Whirlpools and Lifebelts requires quick calculations, but is based on the chance throw of the dice. Trees versus Axeman starts with the chance positioning of initial pieces but then becomes a game of pure skill; the chance positioning at the start ensures that every time it is played the game is different. Some games combine chance (usually resulting from the throw of dice) with players having choices (I've brought you back a baby dragon, Tulip Birds and Daffodil Birds, Gravestones and Dry Bones, and Vegetable Thieves). For example, in Vegetable Thieves players may be given the choice between theft and murder. Danger Money is a game of chance, but with an element of gambling - a kind of choice.

I have developed a house style for my games. Essentially the pieces are very colourful sculptural objects, made of Fimo (modelling clay). The boards are complex pen and ink drawings on paper, attached to brightly-painted mdf boards. The intention is to make games that are beautiful: appealing to look at and to handle.

Ideally the layout of the board itself makes it clear where the start and end points are, which direction to move in, and so on. Some of my earlier boards are less successful at this and therefore require additional explanation.

In practical terms, the pieces should be the right size for the board, be easy to pick up and move, and not fall over or roll about if the board is joggled. I often choose to gives my pieces faces and character in order to engage the emotions (as with Whirlpools and Lifebelts).

It is easier for players to learn to play a game quickly if at least some of the usual conventions of board games are followed. There are some common conventions that I usually follow. For example, players usually take it in turns in a clockwise direction round the table, and I often use dice and cards as the means for determining moves. Some of my games have a family similarity to existing games: Gravestones and Dry Bones has some elements in common with Flounders or Beetle, Hitched with draughts, and Danger Money with roulette.

I also choose to act against conventions on some occasions. Conventionally most board games are fair in the sense of giving the players the same starting point and equal opportunities. However, in Tulip Birds and Daffodil Birds, both the starting points and the instruction cards are unfair. The vast majority of instructions discriminate by giving different instructions to Tulip Birds and Daffodil Birds. Players are at the mercy of the assumptions, expectations and prejudices about the two different kinds of bird.

Shopping Spree confounds expectations in a different way; players expect that purchasing objects will benefit them. As the game progresses, they realise that spending money simply leads them into debt, and that they need to stay solvent in order to win.

Many commercial games are implicitly competitive and vicious, resulting in outcomes such as death in battle (chess) or bankruptcy (Monopoly). My games makes this competitiveness and violence overt. For example, in Shopping Spree, players who end up in debt are given a choice of a gun, knife, poison or rope with which to end their lives. In Vegetable Thieves, the 'thieves' have guns with which to wound or kill other players' pieces.

My games are intended to be enjoyable sociable interactions. However, some also explore the fragility of everyday life. Many of my games place people in situations that - in a broadly peaceful UK environment - they believe that they are unlikely to encounter or would be able to navigate successfully: the need to migrate (Whirlpools and Lifebelts), the threat of violent death (Vegetable Thieves and Board Game), being a pawn in a war (Danger Money), overwhelming debt (Shopping Spree), and overt discrimination (Tulip Birds and Daffodil Birds).

My games are intended to be played by anyone who wants to - not just board game enthusiasts - often in a gallery and in association with an exhibition of my other work. They are not intended for sale, and they only exist as single unique versions. In the gallery context, they are perceived as both original playable games and as works of art that are animated and completed by people playing them; other visitors become engaged by watching the progress of play.

Cally Trench
June 2024, revised July 2025