1126 lines
31 KiB
Markdown
1126 lines
31 KiB
Markdown
# BMM Planning Workflows (Phase 2)
|
|
|
|
## Overview
|
|
|
|
Phase 2 (Planning) workflows are **required** for all projects. They transform strategic vision into actionable requirements that guide implementation. BMM uses a **scale-adaptive planning system** where the workflow automatically selects the right level of detail based on project complexity.
|
|
|
|
**Key principle:** One workflow to rule them all - `plan-project` intelligently routes to the appropriate planning flow based on project characteristics.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 2 Planning Flow
|
|
|
|
```mermaid
|
|
%%{init: {'theme':'base', 'themeVariables': { 'primaryColor':'#fff','primaryTextColor':'#000','primaryBorderColor':'#000','lineColor':'#000','fontSize':'16px','fontFamily':'arial'}}}%%
|
|
graph TB
|
|
Entry["<b>START: plan-project</b><br/>Discovery and routing"]
|
|
|
|
subgraph QuickFlow["<b>QUICK FLOW (Levels 0-1)</b>"]
|
|
TechSpec["<b>PM: tech-spec</b><br/>Lightweight spec for simple changes"]
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
subgraph StandardFlow["<b>STANDARD PLANNING (Levels 2-4)</b>"]
|
|
PRD["<b>PM: prd</b><br/>Strategic PRD"]
|
|
GDD["<b>Game Designer: gdd</b><br/>Game design document"]
|
|
Narrative["<b>Game Designer: narrative</b><br/>Story-driven design"]
|
|
UXDesign["<b>UX Designer: ux</b><br/>UX-first specification"]
|
|
|
|
Epics["<b>PM: create-epics-and-stories</b><br/>Break requirements into epics and stories"]
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
subgraph Updates["<b>STORY UPDATES (Anytime After Epics Created)</b>"]
|
|
CorrectCourse["<b>PM/SM: correct-course</b><br/>Update epics/stories mid-stream"]
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
Entry -->|Level 0-1<br/>Simple| QuickFlow
|
|
Entry -->|Level 2-4<br/>Software| PRD
|
|
Entry -->|Level 2-4<br/>Game| GDD
|
|
Entry -->|Level 2-4<br/>Story-driven| Narrative
|
|
Entry -->|Level 2-4<br/>UX-first| UXDesign
|
|
|
|
PRD --> Epics
|
|
GDD --> Epics
|
|
Narrative --> Epics
|
|
UXDesign -.->|May update| Epics
|
|
|
|
Epics --> Phase3["<b>Phase 3: Architecture</b>"]
|
|
Phase3 -.->|May update| Epics
|
|
|
|
QuickFlow --> Phase4["<b>Phase 4: Implementation</b>"]
|
|
Phase3 --> Phase4
|
|
|
|
Phase4 -.->|Significant changes| CorrectCourse
|
|
CorrectCourse -.->|Updates| Epics
|
|
|
|
style Entry fill:#fff9c4,stroke:#f57f17,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
|
style QuickFlow fill:#c5e1a5,stroke:#33691e,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
|
style StandardFlow fill:#e1bee7,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
|
style Updates fill:#ffcdd2,stroke:#c62828,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
|
style Phase3 fill:#90caf9,stroke:#0d47a1,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
style Phase4 fill:#ffcc80,stroke:#e65100,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
|
|
style TechSpec fill:#aed581,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
style PRD fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
style GDD fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
style Narrative fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
style UXDesign fill:#ce93d8,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
style Epics fill:#ba68c8,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
|
style CorrectCourse fill:#ef5350,stroke:#c62828,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Quick Reference
|
|
|
|
| Workflow | Agent | Project Levels | Purpose |
|
|
| ---------------------------- | ------------- | -------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- |
|
|
| **prd** | PM | 2-4 | Strategic PRD |
|
|
| **create-epics-and-stories** | PM | 2-4 | Break PRD/GDD into epics and stories (standalone OK) |
|
|
| **tech-spec** | PM | 0-1 | Lightweight technical specification |
|
|
| **gdd** | Game Designer | 2-4 (games) | Complete game design document |
|
|
| **narrative** | Game Designer | 2-4 (story) | Story-driven game/experience design |
|
|
| **ux** | UX Designer | 2-4 (UX-heavy) | UX-first design specification |
|
|
|
|
**Note:** The `plan-project` workflow is your single entry point. It automatically routes to the right planning workflow based on your answers to discovery questions.
|
|
|
|
**Critical:** After PRD/GDD/Narrative complete, you must run `create-epics-and-stories` to generate user stories (can be done in same chat or separate chat later). These stories can be updated anytime via UX-Design, Architecture decisions, or `correct-course` during implementation.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Understanding Scale-Adaptive Planning
|
|
|
|
### Project Complexity Levels
|
|
|
|
BMM categorizes projects into 5 levels (0-4) to determine the appropriate planning detail:
|
|
|
|
| Level | Scope | Planning Workflow | Examples |
|
|
| ----------- | ----------------------- | -------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
|
| **Level 0** | Single atomic change | **tech-spec** (Quick Spec) | Bug fix, single endpoint, config change |
|
|
| **Level 1** | Simple isolated feature | **tech-spec** (Quick Spec) | Add validation rule, new API field, small UI component |
|
|
| **Level 2** | Medium feature | **prd** (Lightweight) | User profile page, search feature, data export |
|
|
| **Level 3** | Large feature set | **prd** (Standard) | Complete authentication system, admin dashboard |
|
|
| **Level 4** | Multi-phase initiative | **prd** (Comprehensive) | Platform migration, new product line, enterprise integration |
|
|
|
|
### How Scale-Adaptive Planning Works
|
|
|
|
**Step 1: Intent Discovery**
|
|
The `plan-project` workflow asks you questions to understand:
|
|
|
|
- What are you building?
|
|
- How complex is it?
|
|
- Is this greenfield or brownfield?
|
|
- What are the primary concerns? (features, UX, story, technical architecture)
|
|
|
|
**Step 2: Intelligent Routing**
|
|
Based on your answers, the workflow routes to:
|
|
|
|
- **tech-spec** (Levels 0-1): Quick Spec Flow for simple changes
|
|
- **prd** (Levels 2-4): Strategic PRD with epic breakdown
|
|
- **gdd** (Levels 2-4, games): Game Design Document
|
|
- **narrative** (Levels 2-4, story-heavy): Narrative-first design
|
|
- **ux** (Levels 2-4, UX-first): UX specification with prototypes
|
|
|
|
**Step 3: Adaptive Detail**
|
|
Each workflow adjusts its depth based on level:
|
|
|
|
- Level 2: Lightweight documentation
|
|
- Level 3: Standard documentation with multiple epics
|
|
- Level 4: Comprehensive documentation with phased delivery
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## plan-project (Entry Point)
|
|
|
|
### Purpose
|
|
|
|
Single unified entry point for all planning workflows. Uses conversational discovery to understand your project and intelligently route to the appropriate planning flow.
|
|
|
|
**Agent:** PM (orchestrates other agents as needed)
|
|
**Phase:** 2 (Planning)
|
|
**Required:** Yes (for all projects)
|
|
|
|
### When to Use
|
|
|
|
**Always use this as your planning starting point.** Do not call prd, gdd, narrative, ux, or tech-spec directly unless you explicitly want to skip discovery.
|
|
|
|
### Process Overview
|
|
|
|
**Phase 1: Discovery (Steps 1-3)**
|
|
|
|
- Understand project context
|
|
- Assess complexity level (0-4)
|
|
- Identify primary concerns (features, UX, story, technical)
|
|
|
|
**Phase 2: Routing Decision (Step 4)**
|
|
|
|
- Determine target workflow
|
|
- Explain routing rationale
|
|
- Confirm with user
|
|
|
|
**Phase 3: Execute Target Workflow (Steps 5-6)**
|
|
|
|
- Invoke appropriate planning workflow
|
|
- Pass context and decisions
|
|
- Return to plan-project for completion
|
|
|
|
**Phase 4: Handoff (Step 7)**
|
|
|
|
- Document planning decisions
|
|
- Recommend next phase workflows
|
|
- Update workflow status
|
|
|
|
### Discovery Questions
|
|
|
|
**Project Type:**
|
|
|
|
- What are you building? (software product, game, internal tool, etc.)
|
|
- Is this greenfield (new) or brownfield (existing)?
|
|
|
|
**Complexity Assessment:**
|
|
|
|
- How would you describe the scope? (single change, simple feature, medium feature, large feature set, multi-phase initiative)
|
|
- How many user-facing features are involved?
|
|
- How many systems or integrations are affected?
|
|
|
|
**Primary Concerns:**
|
|
|
|
- What's most important for this project? (feature functionality, user experience, narrative/story, technical architecture, performance)
|
|
|
|
**Special Characteristics:**
|
|
|
|
- Is this a game project?
|
|
- Is storytelling central to the experience?
|
|
- Is UX innovation the primary differentiator?
|
|
- Are there unique technical constraints?
|
|
|
|
### Routing Logic
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
IF game_project AND level >= 2:
|
|
→ Route to gdd
|
|
|
|
ELSE IF story_central AND level >= 2:
|
|
→ Route to narrative
|
|
|
|
ELSE IF ux_innovation AND level >= 2:
|
|
→ Route to ux
|
|
|
|
ELSE IF level <= 1:
|
|
→ Route to tech-spec (Quick Spec Flow)
|
|
|
|
ELSE:
|
|
→ Route to prd (with level-appropriate depth)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Outputs
|
|
|
|
- Planning decision document (routing rationale)
|
|
- Output from target workflow (PRD, GDD, Tech Spec, etc.)
|
|
- Handoff recommendations for Phase 3
|
|
|
|
### Example Scenarios
|
|
|
|
**Scenario 1: Bug Fix**
|
|
|
|
- **Input**: "Fix null pointer exception in user service"
|
|
- **Discovery**: Level 0 (single atomic change)
|
|
- **Route**: tech-spec (Quick Spec Flow)
|
|
|
|
**Scenario 2: E-commerce Checkout**
|
|
|
|
- **Input**: "Build complete checkout flow with payment processing"
|
|
- **Discovery**: Level 3 (large feature set), feature-focused
|
|
- **Route**: prd (Standard depth)
|
|
|
|
**Scenario 3: Roguelike Card Game**
|
|
|
|
- **Input**: "Roguelike card battler with emotional narrative"
|
|
- **Discovery**: Level 3 (large feature set), game project
|
|
- **Route**: gdd
|
|
|
|
**Scenario 4: Story-Driven Adventure**
|
|
|
|
- **Input**: "Narrative adventure game with branching story"
|
|
- **Discovery**: Level 3, story-central
|
|
- **Route**: narrative (then gdd for mechanics)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## tech-spec (Quick Spec Flow)
|
|
|
|
### Purpose
|
|
|
|
Lightweight technical specification for Levels 0-1 projects (single changes, simple features). Focuses on implementation details without heavy strategic planning.
|
|
|
|
**Agent:** Architect
|
|
**Phase:** 2 (Planning)
|
|
**Project Levels:** 0-1
|
|
|
|
### When to Use
|
|
|
|
- Bug fixes
|
|
- Single API endpoint additions
|
|
- Configuration changes
|
|
- Small UI component additions
|
|
- Isolated validation rules
|
|
- Single-file modifications
|
|
|
|
**When NOT to use:**
|
|
|
|
- Multiple interconnected changes → Use **prd**
|
|
- User-facing feature with multiple screens → Use **prd**
|
|
- Requires epic breakdown → Use **prd**
|
|
|
|
### Process Overview
|
|
|
|
**Step 1: Problem Definition**
|
|
|
|
- What's broken or missing?
|
|
- What's the desired behavior?
|
|
- What are the constraints?
|
|
|
|
**Step 2: Technical Analysis**
|
|
|
|
- Current state assessment
|
|
- Root cause (if bug)
|
|
- Dependencies identified
|
|
|
|
**Step 3: Solution Design**
|
|
|
|
- Implementation approach
|
|
- Code changes required
|
|
- Test strategy
|
|
- Rollback plan
|
|
|
|
**Step 4: Documentation**
|
|
|
|
- Quick Spec document generated
|
|
- Handoff to implementation
|
|
|
|
### Inputs
|
|
|
|
- Problem description or feature request
|
|
- Current codebase context (if brownfield)
|
|
- Technical constraints
|
|
- Acceptance criteria (simple)
|
|
|
|
### Outputs
|
|
|
|
**Primary Output:** `tech-spec-{feature-name}-{date}.md`
|
|
|
|
**Document Structure:**
|
|
|
|
1. Problem Statement
|
|
2. Current State Analysis
|
|
3. Proposed Solution
|
|
4. Implementation Details
|
|
- Files to modify
|
|
- API changes
|
|
- Database changes (if any)
|
|
- Configuration changes
|
|
5. Test Strategy
|
|
6. Rollback Plan
|
|
7. Acceptance Criteria
|
|
8. Risk Assessment (lightweight)
|
|
|
|
### Example Output
|
|
|
|
**Problem:** Null pointer exception when user has no profile image
|
|
|
|
**Solution:**
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Quick Spec: Fix Profile Image Null Pointer
|
|
|
|
## Problem
|
|
|
|
Users without profile images cause NPE in UserProfileService.java:line 42
|
|
|
|
## Root Cause
|
|
|
|
Method assumes profileImageUrl is never null, but DB allows NULL
|
|
|
|
## Solution
|
|
|
|
1. Add null check in UserProfileService
|
|
2. Return default placeholder image URL
|
|
3. Add unit test for null case
|
|
|
|
## Implementation
|
|
|
|
- File: `UserProfileService.java`
|
|
- Change: Add null guard: `if (user.profileImageUrl == null) return DEFAULT_AVATAR_URL;`
|
|
- Test: `UserProfileServiceTest.java` - new test case
|
|
- No DB migration needed
|
|
|
|
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
|
|
- AC-1: Users with null profile image see default avatar
|
|
- AC-2: No NPE in logs
|
|
- AC-3: Unit test passes
|
|
|
|
## Risk: LOW
|
|
|
|
- Isolated change, single method
|
|
- Backward compatible
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Related Workflows
|
|
|
|
- **dev-story** (Phase 4) - Implement the spec
|
|
- **prd** - Use for more complex features
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## prd (Product Requirements Document)
|
|
|
|
### Purpose
|
|
|
|
Strategic PRD with tactical epic breakdown for Levels 2-4 projects. Unified workflow that adapts depth based on project complexity.
|
|
|
|
**Agent:** PM (with Architect and Analyst support)
|
|
**Phase:** 2 (Planning)
|
|
**Project Levels:** 2-4
|
|
|
|
### When to Use
|
|
|
|
- Medium to large feature sets
|
|
- Multi-screen user experiences
|
|
- Complex business logic
|
|
- Multiple system integrations
|
|
- Phased delivery required
|
|
|
|
### Scale-Adaptive Structure
|
|
|
|
**Level 2 (Lightweight PRD):**
|
|
|
|
- Single epic with 5-10 stories
|
|
- Simplified competitive analysis
|
|
- Basic technical considerations
|
|
- 10-15 pages
|
|
|
|
**Level 3 (Standard PRD):**
|
|
|
|
- 2-4 epics with 15-30 stories
|
|
- Comprehensive competitive analysis
|
|
- Detailed technical requirements
|
|
- Risk assessment
|
|
- 20-30 pages
|
|
|
|
**Level 4 (Comprehensive PRD):**
|
|
|
|
- 5+ epics with 30-50+ stories
|
|
- Multi-phase delivery plan
|
|
- Enterprise architecture considerations
|
|
- Extensive stakeholder analysis
|
|
- Success metrics framework
|
|
- 30-50+ pages
|
|
|
|
### Process Overview
|
|
|
|
**Phase 1: Strategic Foundation (Steps 1-4)**
|
|
|
|
- Problem and opportunity definition
|
|
- User research and personas
|
|
- Competitive analysis
|
|
- Success criteria and metrics
|
|
|
|
**Phase 2: Solution Definition (Steps 5-8)**
|
|
|
|
- Core capabilities and features
|
|
- User experience principles
|
|
- Technical requirements
|
|
- Integration points
|
|
|
|
**Phase 3: Epic Breakdown (Steps 9-12)**
|
|
|
|
- Identify epics (level-appropriate count)
|
|
- Define user stories per epic
|
|
- Prioritize stories (P0/P1/P2/P3)
|
|
- Sequence for delivery
|
|
|
|
**Phase 4: Planning and Risks (Steps 13-15)**
|
|
|
|
- Resource estimation
|
|
- Risk assessment
|
|
- Assumptions and dependencies
|
|
- Success metrics finalized
|
|
|
|
**Phase 5: Documentation (Step 16)**
|
|
|
|
- Generate final PRD
|
|
- Create epic files
|
|
- Handoff preparation
|
|
|
|
### Inputs
|
|
|
|
Optional:
|
|
|
|
- product-brief.md (from Phase 1)
|
|
- market-research.md (from Phase 1)
|
|
- competitive-analysis.md (from Phase 1)
|
|
- User input through conversational process
|
|
|
|
### Outputs
|
|
|
|
**Primary Outputs:**
|
|
|
|
1. **PRD.md**: Complete product requirements document
|
|
2. **epics.md**: All epics with story breakdown
|
|
3. **Epic Files**: Individual files per epic (e.g., `epic-1-authentication.md`)
|
|
|
|
**PRD Structure:**
|
|
|
|
1. Executive Summary
|
|
2. Problem Statement (with evidence)
|
|
3. Goals and Success Metrics
|
|
4. User Personas and Scenarios
|
|
5. Competitive Landscape
|
|
6. Feature Requirements
|
|
- Core capabilities
|
|
- User stories (organized by epic)
|
|
- Acceptance criteria
|
|
7. User Experience Requirements
|
|
8. Technical Requirements
|
|
9. Integration Requirements
|
|
10. Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)
|
|
11. Assumptions and Constraints
|
|
12. Risks and Mitigation
|
|
13. Success Metrics
|
|
14. Glossary
|
|
|
|
**Epic File Structure:**
|
|
|
|
- Epic overview and objectives
|
|
- User stories with acceptance criteria
|
|
- Story priorities (P0/P1/P2/P3)
|
|
- Dependencies and sequencing
|
|
- Technical notes
|
|
- Success criteria
|
|
|
|
### Example: Level 3 PRD for E-commerce Checkout
|
|
|
|
**Strategic Section:**
|
|
|
|
- **Problem**: 68% cart abandonment rate vs 45% industry average
|
|
- **Goal**: Reduce abandonment to 50% in 6 months
|
|
- **Users**: Primary (buyers), Secondary (guest checkout)
|
|
- **Competitors**: Shopify (1-click), Amazon (save payment)
|
|
|
|
**Epic Breakdown:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Epic 1: Guest Checkout** (7 stories)
|
|
- P0: Guest can checkout without account
|
|
- P1: Email receipt sent
|
|
- P2: Optional account creation
|
|
2. **Epic 2: Payment Processing** (8 stories)
|
|
- P0: Credit card integration (Stripe)
|
|
- P1: Saved payment methods
|
|
- P2: Alternative payments (PayPal, Apple Pay)
|
|
3. **Epic 3: Order Management** (6 stories)
|
|
- P0: Order confirmation
|
|
- P1: Order history
|
|
- P2: Order tracking
|
|
|
|
**Total:** 3 epics, 21 stories, 4-6 week delivery
|
|
|
|
### Related Workflows
|
|
|
|
- **product-brief** (Phase 1) - Strategic input
|
|
- **architecture** (Phase 3) - Technical design
|
|
- **tech-spec** (Phase 3) - Detailed specifications
|
|
- **create-epics-and-stories** (Phase 4) - If manual epic creation needed
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## gdd (Game Design Document)
|
|
|
|
### Purpose
|
|
|
|
Complete game design document for Levels 2-4 game projects, adapted from industry-standard GDD formats with practical scoping.
|
|
|
|
**Agent:** PM (Game Designer persona)
|
|
**Phase:** 2 (Planning)
|
|
**Project Levels:** 2-4 (games)
|
|
|
|
### When to Use
|
|
|
|
- Designing a game (any genre)
|
|
- Need comprehensive design documentation
|
|
- Team needs shared vision
|
|
- Publisher/stakeholder communication
|
|
|
|
### Comparison to Traditional GDD
|
|
|
|
**Traditional GDD Weaknesses:**
|
|
|
|
- Too detailed too early
|
|
- Assumes waterfall delivery
|
|
- No connection to implementation tracking
|
|
- No epic/story breakdown
|
|
|
|
**BMM GDD Improvements:**
|
|
|
|
- Scale-adaptive detail
|
|
- Agile epic structure
|
|
- Direct handoff to implementation (Phase 4)
|
|
- Integrated with testing workflows
|
|
|
|
### Process Overview
|
|
|
|
**Phase 1: Core Concept (Steps 1-4)**
|
|
|
|
- High concept and elevator pitch
|
|
- Core gameplay loop
|
|
- Design pillars
|
|
- Player experience goals
|
|
|
|
**Phase 2: Game Systems (Steps 5-10)**
|
|
|
|
- Mechanics definition
|
|
- Progression systems
|
|
- Economy and balance
|
|
- Combat/interaction systems
|
|
- Level/world design
|
|
- Art and audio direction
|
|
|
|
**Phase 3: Content Scope (Steps 11-13)**
|
|
|
|
- Content volume (levels, characters, items)
|
|
- Narrative overview (if applicable)
|
|
- Monetization strategy (if F2P/premium)
|
|
|
|
**Phase 4: Technical and Production (Steps 14-16)**
|
|
|
|
- Platform and technical requirements
|
|
- Team and timeline
|
|
- Risks and challenges
|
|
- Success metrics
|
|
|
|
**Phase 5: Epic Breakdown (Step 17)**
|
|
|
|
- Convert design into epics
|
|
- Create user stories per epic
|
|
- Prioritize features (MVP vs post-launch)
|
|
- Sequence delivery
|
|
|
|
### Inputs
|
|
|
|
Optional:
|
|
|
|
- game-brief.md (from Phase 1)
|
|
- brainstorm-game results (from Phase 1)
|
|
- market-research.md (from Phase 1)
|
|
- Reference game analysis
|
|
|
|
### Outputs
|
|
|
|
**Primary Output:** `GDD-{game-name}-{date}.md`
|
|
|
|
**GDD Structure:**
|
|
|
|
1. Executive Summary
|
|
2. Core Concept
|
|
- High concept
|
|
- Elevator pitch
|
|
- Design pillars
|
|
3. Gameplay
|
|
- Core loop
|
|
- Mechanics
|
|
- Player actions
|
|
- Progression
|
|
4. Game Systems
|
|
- Combat/interaction
|
|
- Economy
|
|
- Progression
|
|
- Customization
|
|
5. World and Narrative
|
|
- Setting
|
|
- Story (if applicable)
|
|
- Characters
|
|
6. Content Scope
|
|
- Levels/missions
|
|
- Characters/enemies
|
|
- Items/abilities
|
|
- Estimated play time
|
|
7. Art Direction
|
|
8. Audio Direction
|
|
9. User Interface/UX
|
|
10. Technical Requirements
|
|
11. Platforms and Performance
|
|
12. Monetization (if applicable)
|
|
13. Epic Breakdown
|
|
14. Success Metrics
|
|
15. Risks and Mitigations
|
|
|
|
**Epic Breakdown** (unique to BMM GDD):
|
|
|
|
- **Epic 1: Core Loop** (foundational mechanics)
|
|
- **Epic 2: Content** (levels, enemies, items)
|
|
- **Epic 3: Progression** (unlocks, upgrades)
|
|
- **Epic 4: Polish** (VFX, audio, UI)
|
|
|
|
### Example: Level 3 GDD for Roguelike Card Game
|
|
|
|
**Core Concept:**
|
|
|
|
- **High Concept**: Slay the Spire meets Hades with emotional narrative
|
|
- **Elevator Pitch**: Roguelike card battler where you play as emotions fighting inner demons
|
|
- **Design Pillars**: Strategic depth, emotional resonance, replayability
|
|
|
|
**Gameplay:**
|
|
|
|
- **Core Loop**: Draw cards → Play cards → Resolve combat → Choose path → Repeat
|
|
- **Progression**: Unlock new cards, characters, and story branches
|
|
- **Run Length**: 45-60 minutes per run
|
|
|
|
**Content Scope:**
|
|
|
|
- 3 playable characters (Anger, Fear, Joy)
|
|
- 120 cards total (40 per character)
|
|
- 50 enemy types
|
|
- 10 bosses
|
|
- 4 zones (acts)
|
|
|
|
**Epic Breakdown:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Epic 1: Core Combat** (8 stories)
|
|
- P0: Card playing and resolution
|
|
- P0: Enemy AI
|
|
- P1: Card effects and combos
|
|
2. **Epic 2: Meta Progression** (6 stories)
|
|
- P0: Unlock system
|
|
- P1: Character progression
|
|
3. **Epic 3: Content** (12 stories)
|
|
- P1: Character 1 (Anger) complete
|
|
- P1: Character 2 (Fear) complete
|
|
- P2: Character 3 (Joy) complete
|
|
|
|
**Estimated Timeline:** 12 months with 3-person team
|
|
|
|
### Related Workflows
|
|
|
|
- **game-brief** (Phase 1) - Strategic input
|
|
- **narrative** (Phase 2) - If story-heavy game
|
|
- **architecture** (Phase 3) - Technical design
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## narrative (Narrative Design)
|
|
|
|
### Purpose
|
|
|
|
Story-driven design workflow for games and experiences where narrative is central. Creates comprehensive narrative documentation including story structure, character arcs, dialogue systems, and narrative implementation guidance.
|
|
|
|
**Agent:** PM (Narrative Designer persona) + Creative Problem Solver (CIS)
|
|
**Phase:** 2 (Planning)
|
|
**Project Levels:** 2-4 (story-driven projects)
|
|
|
|
### When to Use
|
|
|
|
- Story is central to the experience
|
|
- Branching narrative with player choices
|
|
- Character-driven games
|
|
- Visual novels, adventure games, RPGs
|
|
- Interactive fiction
|
|
|
|
**When to combine with GDD:**
|
|
|
|
1. Run **narrative** workflow first (get story structure)
|
|
2. Then run **gdd** workflow (integrate story with gameplay)
|
|
|
|
### Process Overview
|
|
|
|
**Phase 1: Story Foundation (Steps 1-4)**
|
|
|
|
- Story premise and themes
|
|
- Setting and world-building
|
|
- Narrative structure (linear, branching, open)
|
|
- Tone and emotional beats
|
|
|
|
**Phase 2: Character Development (Steps 5-7)**
|
|
|
|
- Protagonist and supporting cast
|
|
- Character arcs and motivations
|
|
- Relationships and dynamics
|
|
|
|
**Phase 3: Story Structure (Steps 8-11)**
|
|
|
|
- Act breakdown (3-act, 5-act, hero's journey)
|
|
- Key narrative beats
|
|
- Choice points and consequences
|
|
- Branching paths (if applicable)
|
|
|
|
**Phase 4: Dialogue and Implementation (Steps 12-15)**
|
|
|
|
- Dialogue system design
|
|
- Voice and writing style
|
|
- Narrative implementation approach
|
|
- Asset requirements (VO, cutscenes, etc.)
|
|
|
|
**Phase 5: Integration Planning (Step 16)**
|
|
|
|
- How narrative integrates with gameplay
|
|
- Pacing and player agency
|
|
- Narrative-gameplay harmony
|
|
|
|
### Inputs
|
|
|
|
Optional:
|
|
|
|
- Story outlines or treatments
|
|
- Character sketches
|
|
- World-building documents
|
|
- Reference stories
|
|
|
|
### Outputs
|
|
|
|
**Primary Output:** `narrative-design-{project-name}-{date}.md`
|
|
|
|
**Document Structure:**
|
|
|
|
1. Narrative Overview
|
|
- Premise
|
|
- Themes
|
|
- Tone
|
|
2. Story Structure
|
|
- Act breakdown
|
|
- Key beats
|
|
- Branching diagram (if applicable)
|
|
3. Characters
|
|
- Character profiles
|
|
- Arcs
|
|
- Relationships
|
|
4. World-Building
|
|
- Setting
|
|
- Lore
|
|
- History
|
|
5. Dialogue System
|
|
- Dialogue structure
|
|
- Choice mechanics
|
|
- Consequence tracking
|
|
6. Implementation Guide
|
|
- Narrative assets needed
|
|
- Integration with gameplay
|
|
- Technical requirements
|
|
7. Narrative Content Scope
|
|
- Total word count
|
|
- Number of scenes/beats
|
|
- Number of endings (if branching)
|
|
- VO line count (if voiced)
|
|
|
|
### Example: Level 3 Narrative for Choice-Driven RPG
|
|
|
|
**Story Premise:**
|
|
You play as a wandering medic in a post-apocalyptic world where healing is outlawed. Each patient you treat changes the world.
|
|
|
|
**Structure:**
|
|
|
|
- 3 acts, 12 chapters
|
|
- 5 major choice points with persistent consequences
|
|
- 3 possible endings (altruistic, pragmatic, corrupted)
|
|
|
|
**Characters:**
|
|
|
|
- **Protagonist**: Dr. Elara Chen (complex moral compass)
|
|
- **Antagonist**: The Overseer (believes healing prolongs suffering)
|
|
- **Supporting**: 8 recurring characters
|
|
|
|
**Branching:**
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Chapter 1 → Choice: Save child or save supplies
|
|
├─ Save child → Village trusts you (Path A)
|
|
└─ Save supplies → Village fears you (Path B)
|
|
|
|
Chapter 5 → Paths converge, new choice: Reveal or hide ability
|
|
├─ Reveal → Public hero route
|
|
└─ Hide → Underground resistance route
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Implementation:**
|
|
|
|
- Total word count: ~60,000 words
|
|
- 40 narrative scenes
|
|
- 15 hours of gameplay
|
|
- 200+ dialogue nodes
|
|
- Optional VO (2,000 lines)
|
|
|
|
**Epic Breakdown:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Epic 1: Act 1 Narrative** (6 stories)
|
|
2. **Epic 2: Act 2 Narrative** (8 stories)
|
|
3. **Epic 3: Act 3 Narrative** (7 stories)
|
|
4. **Epic 4: Branching Implementation** (5 stories)
|
|
|
|
### Related Workflows
|
|
|
|
- **gdd** (Phase 2) - Combine narrative with gameplay
|
|
- **ux** (Phase 2) - Narrative UI/UX design
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## ux (UX-First Design)
|
|
|
|
### Purpose
|
|
|
|
UX specification workflow for projects where user experience is the primary differentiator or innovation area. Facilitates visual exploration and informed decision-making rather than template-driven design.
|
|
|
|
**Agent:** UX Designer
|
|
**Phase:** 2 (Planning)
|
|
**Project Levels:** 2-4 (UX-heavy projects)
|
|
|
|
### When to Use
|
|
|
|
- UX is the primary competitive advantage
|
|
- Complex user workflows needing design thinking
|
|
- Innovative interaction patterns
|
|
- Design system creation
|
|
- Accessibility-critical experiences
|
|
|
|
**When NOT to use:**
|
|
|
|
- Standard CRUD interfaces → Use **prd**
|
|
- Gameplay-first games → Use **gdd**
|
|
- Backend-focused APIs → Use **tech-spec**
|
|
|
|
### Collaborative UX Design Approach
|
|
|
|
**This is NOT a template filler.** The UX workflow facilitates:
|
|
|
|
1. **Visual Exploration**: Generate multiple design options
|
|
2. **Informed Decisions**: Evaluate options with user needs
|
|
3. **Collaborative Design**: Work with AI to refine iteratively
|
|
4. **Living Documentation**: UX spec evolves with project
|
|
|
|
### Process Overview
|
|
|
|
**Phase 1: UX Foundation (Steps 1-4)**
|
|
|
|
- User research and personas
|
|
- User journeys and workflows
|
|
- Pain points and opportunities
|
|
- UX principles and goals
|
|
|
|
**Phase 2: Design Exploration (Steps 5-8)**
|
|
|
|
- Generate multiple design directions
|
|
- Wireframes and mockups
|
|
- Interaction patterns
|
|
- Visual design options
|
|
|
|
**Phase 3: Design Refinement (Steps 9-12)**
|
|
|
|
- Collaborative iteration
|
|
- Accessibility validation
|
|
- Responsive design considerations
|
|
- Component library definition
|
|
|
|
**Phase 4: Specification (Steps 13-15)**
|
|
|
|
- Detailed interaction specs
|
|
- Design system documentation
|
|
- Handoff to development
|
|
- Epic breakdown with UX stories
|
|
|
|
### Inputs
|
|
|
|
Optional:
|
|
|
|
- User research data
|
|
- Analytics and heatmaps
|
|
- Competitor UX analysis
|
|
- Brand guidelines
|
|
- Accessibility requirements
|
|
|
|
### Outputs
|
|
|
|
**Primary Output:** `ux-spec-{project-name}-{date}.md`
|
|
|
|
**Document Structure:**
|
|
|
|
1. UX Vision and Principles
|
|
2. User Research Summary
|
|
3. User Journeys
|
|
4. Information Architecture
|
|
5. Wireframes and Mockups
|
|
6. Interaction Specifications
|
|
- Screen-by-screen flows
|
|
- Micro-interactions
|
|
- Error states
|
|
- Loading states
|
|
7. Design System
|
|
- Components
|
|
- Patterns
|
|
- Tokens (colors, typography, spacing)
|
|
8. Accessibility Requirements
|
|
9. Responsive Behavior
|
|
10. Epic Breakdown (UX Stories)
|
|
|
|
### Example: Level 3 UX Spec for Dashboard Redesign
|
|
|
|
**UX Vision:**
|
|
"Information at a glance with progressive disclosure"
|
|
|
|
**User Journey:**
|
|
|
|
1. User lands on dashboard
|
|
2. Scans key metrics (glanceable)
|
|
3. Drills into details (progressive disclosure)
|
|
4. Takes action (in-context controls)
|
|
|
|
**Wireframes Generated:**
|
|
|
|
- Option A: Card-based layout (familiar, modular)
|
|
- Option B: Single-column feed (mobile-first)
|
|
- Option C: Split-pane (power user)
|
|
|
|
**Decision:** Option A (card-based) with Option C (split-pane) for power users via toggle
|
|
|
|
**Design System:**
|
|
|
|
- 5 card components (metric, chart, table, activity, action)
|
|
- 12 color tokens (accessible contrast ratios)
|
|
- Responsive grid (12-column)
|
|
|
|
**Epic Breakdown:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Epic 1: Core Layout** (4 stories)
|
|
- P0: Responsive grid system
|
|
- P0: Card component library
|
|
2. **Epic 2: Data Visualization** (6 stories)
|
|
- P1: Chart components
|
|
- P1: Real-time updates
|
|
3. **Epic 3: Accessibility** (3 stories)
|
|
- P0: Keyboard navigation
|
|
- P1: Screen reader support
|
|
|
|
### Related Workflows
|
|
|
|
- **prd** (Phase 2) - UX spec feeds feature requirements
|
|
- **architecture** (Phase 3) - Frontend architecture decisions
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Decision Guide: Which Planning Workflow?
|
|
|
|
### Use `plan-project` (Recommended)
|
|
|
|
Let the workflow discover your needs and route appropriately.
|
|
|
|
### Direct Workflow Selection (Advanced)
|
|
|
|
**For bug fixes or single changes:**
|
|
→ **tech-spec** (Quick Spec Flow)
|
|
|
|
**For software products (Levels 2-4):**
|
|
→ **prd**
|
|
|
|
**For games (Levels 2-4):**
|
|
→ **gdd** (if gameplay-first)
|
|
→ **narrative** + **gdd** (if story-first)
|
|
|
|
**For story-driven experiences (non-games):**
|
|
→ **narrative** + **prd**
|
|
|
|
**For UX-first projects:**
|
|
→ **ux** + **prd**
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Integration with Phase 3 (Solutioning)
|
|
|
|
Planning workflows produce requirements that feed into Solutioning:
|
|
|
|
| Planning Output | Solutioning Input |
|
|
| -------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
|
|
| PRD.md | **architecture** workflow (Level 3-4) |
|
|
| epics.md | **tech-spec** workflow (Level 3-4) |
|
|
| GDD.md | **architecture** workflow (game tech) |
|
|
| narrative-design.md | **architecture** (narrative systems) |
|
|
| ux-spec.md | **architecture** (frontend design) |
|
|
| tech-spec.md (Quick) | **dev-story** (Level 0-1) |
|
|
|
|
**Key Decision Point:**
|
|
|
|
- **Levels 0-1**: Skip Solutioning, go directly to Phase 4 (Implementation)
|
|
- **Levels 2**: Optional Solutioning (simple architecture)
|
|
- **Levels 3-4**: **Required** Solutioning (architecture + tech-spec)
|
|
|
|
See: [workflows-solutioning.md](./workflows-solutioning.md)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Best Practices for Phase 2
|
|
|
|
### 1. Always Start with `plan-project`
|
|
|
|
Unless you're absolutely certain which workflow you need, use the entry point. It will save time and ensure you get the right level of detail.
|
|
|
|
### 2. Level Honestly
|
|
|
|
Don't over-plan simple features or under-plan complex initiatives. Be honest about project complexity.
|
|
|
|
### 3. Iterate on Requirements
|
|
|
|
Planning documents are living. You can refine PRDs/GDDs as you learn more during Solutioning and Implementation.
|
|
|
|
### 4. Involve Stakeholders Early
|
|
|
|
Review PRDs/GDDs with stakeholders before proceeding to Solutioning. Catch misalignment early.
|
|
|
|
### 5. Focus on "What" Not "How"
|
|
|
|
Planning defines **what** to build and **why**. Leave **how** (technical design) to Phase 3 (Solutioning).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Common Anti-Patterns
|
|
|
|
### ❌ Skipping Planning
|
|
|
|
"We'll just start coding and figure it out."
|
|
→ **Result**: Scope creep, rework, missed requirements
|
|
|
|
### ❌ Over-Planning Simple Changes
|
|
|
|
"Let me write a 20-page PRD for this button color change."
|
|
→ **Result**: Wasted time, analysis paralysis
|
|
|
|
### ❌ Planning Without Discovery
|
|
|
|
"I already know what I want, skip the questions."
|
|
→ **Result**: Solving wrong problem, missing opportunities
|
|
|
|
### ❌ Treating PRD as Immutable
|
|
|
|
"The PRD is locked, no changes allowed."
|
|
→ **Result**: Ignoring new information, rigid planning
|
|
|
|
### ✅ Correct Approach
|
|
|
|
- Use scale-adaptive planning (right level for complexity)
|
|
- Involve stakeholders in review
|
|
- Iterate as you learn
|
|
- Keep planning docs living and updated
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
|
|
Phase 2 Planning workflows transform vision into actionable requirements:
|
|
|
|
| Input | Planning Workflow | Output |
|
|
| ----------------- | ----------------- | ---------------- |
|
|
| Product idea | **prd** | PRD + Epics |
|
|
| Game concept | **gdd** | GDD + Epics |
|
|
| Story idea | **narrative** | Narrative Design |
|
|
| UX innovation | **ux** | UX Specification |
|
|
| Bug/simple change | **tech-spec** | Quick Spec |
|
|
|
|
**Key Takeaway:** Planning is **required** for all projects, but the **depth adapts** to project complexity. Trust the scale-adaptive system to guide the right level of detail.
|
|
|
|
**Next Phase:** Solutioning (Phase 3) - Technical architecture and detailed specifications
|
|
|
|
See: [workflows-solutioning.md](./workflows-solutioning.md)
|