← Instructional Design · Project Management

Case Study

One Storyboard, Two Deliveries

20 Below runs on a handful of systems that people have to learn: a bug report button in every tool, a playtest feedback form, private Discord forums where every report becomes a ticket, and a press outreach routine. I designed a three-course training suite to teach them. I storyboarded each course from the facts of tools that had already shipped, then built the suite twice: in Articulate Rise 360 to the game’s brand, and as free pages on the game’s own site, where it’s in use.

Role

Producer: design decisions and every ruling the courses needed.

Team

Claude (AI assistant), using an AI-assisted workflow.

Timeline

30 September – 1 October 2026.

Result

Three courses live for players, playtesters and the team; four Rise courses published as samples; ten process gaps closed along the way.

The Problem

The tools existed before the training did. A bug report from any tool became a numbered ticket in a private forum, playtest feedback had its own form and forum, and the press kit and marketing plan were written. But the knowledge of how it all fit together lived in one head, mine. Every new player, playtester and team member would otherwise learn it by asking.

Two other things shaped the work. I wanted the suite to show brand compliance next to a neutral corporate course I’d built in the same tool. And whatever got built had to keep working for a free game with no training budget.

Analysis: Four Audiences, Three Courses

The ticket system serves three of those audiences, so it became one course in three parts, each able to stand alone. A player never sits through triage, and the team can be sent straight to Part 3.

Design Decisions

Write down the facts before the lessons

Every storyboard opens with a list of the facts it relies on, each taken from a tool that had shipped: the bug form’s fields, what’s sent with a report, the ticket tags, the playtest kinds, and the forum each report lands in. That list keeps a course from teaching something the tools don’t do. It also showed exactly where the facts ran out.

A course can’t teach what nobody has decided

Where a fact was missing, the course couldn’t be written, so each gap came to me as a single question. Who triages, and how fast? What happens to a report someone already sent? Who approves a pitch? Can playtesters stream what they’re testing? Ten rulings came out of the three storyboards. Two of them changed the live systems as well as the courses: the bug forum gained a Duplicate tag, and playtesters now join through an application form that records the name to credit them under.

Choose the block by the learner’s job

Rise offers a shelf of interactive blocks, and it’s tempting to use them for variety. Instead, each block was matched to what the learner has to do. Sorting is for telling problems apart. Process steps are for procedures that run in order. Flashcards pair a weak example with a strong one. Accordions hold what people will look up later. Every knowledge check’s wrong-answer feedback restates the rule, so a miss still teaches something.

One tool, two brand systems

The suite was built in Rise next to a corporate course I’d made earlier, Designing a Job Aid People Actually Use. That course is deliberately neutral: a fictional warehouse, stock photography and an orange accent. The 20 Below courses use the game’s cover art, navy headers, display headings and blue accent, applied the same way across all three.

Make the reward something you can check

The first draft of the playtester course said especially detailed feedback might earn a place in the game as a character. Nobody could check that, so it couldn’t be promised. I set criteria the team can see on a ticket. A report earns a Detailed tag when it does five things: names the rule, says what happened in order, gives numbers, says how the table reacted, and suggests what would work better. A playtester who earns one in every round and answers the team’s follow-up questions within a week will be written into Backwater Static. The course teaches the same five-point checklist the team uses at triage.

Design once, deliver twice

Keeping the courses in Rise would have meant a licence at $1,449 a year, which a free game’s internal training can’t justify. So the Rise builds were exported and published as portfolio samples. The suite was then rebuilt from the same storyboards as pages on the game’s own site, in its own style. The pages share one set of components: accordions, tabs, flip cards, sorting, knowledge checks and a scored final check. They read in order even without JavaScript, and progress is kept in the learner’s own browser.

Every course points at a real door

Training that ends with “now go do it” needs a door to go through. Each course points at one that’s live: the bug button, the playtest form, the application page and the press kit. Each feeds a forum where tags are the status and the thread is the conversation. The playtester channel’s pinned post names the current round and links the course, so learners find it at the moment they need it.

How the Work Ran

• One question at a time. Each gap came to me as a single question with a recommended answer, so a ruling never waited on a meeting.
• Existing sources first. The press kit and marketing plan supplied the pitching course’s description, outlet list and rules. They also corrected the draft’s follow-up timing from one week to about three.
• Every answer key was tested in both deliveries, and both were checked for leftover template content before release.
• A cost decision made in the open. I priced the licence, weighed it against what the courses are for, and kept the design work by rebuilding rather than paying.

Outcome

All three courses are live on 20belowrpg.com, linked from the channels where each audience works. The Rise versions are published as eLearning samples alongside the corporate course. The rulings the courses forced now run the systems themselves: triage within 48 hours, duplicates tagged, pitches approved before they go out, and playtester rewards anyone can check.

Neither delivery tracks individual learners, so the evidence will come from the systems the courses teach. That means the share of reports tagged Detailed in each round, reports per playtester against the one-session minimum, duplicate rate and time to first reply. It also means comparing report quality in Round 1 with reports sent before the course. Round 1 has just opened.

Credits

Design decisions and rulings	Me, as producer
Source material for the pitching course	The 20 Below press kit and marketing plan
Package Deliverables and drafts	Claude (AI assistant), checked by me