by Remo Conzadori

By Remo Conzadori & Andrea Mainini

Sometimes, a game begins with a simple idea that refuses to grow. Other times, it just needs the right collaboration to finally take root.

A Mechanic Looking for a Game

For a few months, I had been experimenting with a “sowing” mechanic. I was intrigued by the idea, but all my attempts felt flat—confined to abstract hex grids that never quite came alive. I knew there was potential, but I couldn’t find the right direction.

At the beginning of 2025, during the winter holidays, I decided to reach out to Andrea Mainini. We had known each other for years but had never designed a game together. With IDEAG—the annual gathering of Italian game designers in Parma—just around the corner, I proposed a challenge: build something playable in just a few days, and develop it live during the event.

Ambitious? Definitely. But Andrea said yes immediately.

After a few online discussions, we aligned on a rough direction. Then Andrea showed me his first prototype—and everything changed. Gone were the hex grids. In their place was a lush, organic vision: mushrooms, a modular board made of leaf-covered tiles, and polyomino pieces of different shapes and sizes. The game already had a strong visual identity and, more importantly, a soul.

It was the moment when the project stopped being an experiment and started becoming Underwood.

Two Days at IDEAG

At IDEAG, we dove in completely. For two intense days, we playtested constantly, with different player counts and a rotating cast of designers joining our table—sometimes late into the night.

One particularly important contribution came from Ignazio Panades, an expert in abstract games, whose insights helped us refine key aspects of the system. We’re truly grateful for his support, as well as for all the other designers who took the time to try the game and share their thoughts.


The atmosphere was exactly what makes events like IDEAG special: open, collaborative, and full of creative energy.

The game evolved rapidly. We moved through many versions in quick succession:
- Simpler versions, focused on clarity
- More complex ones, exploring depth
- Calm and strategic builds
- Others where aggressive play made the experience surprisingly fierce

One of the biggest turning points in this phase came when we realized we had initially pushed the game too far in a very specific direction. Early versions were deliberately aggressive, built around powerful chain reactions that could dramatically shift the board in a single turn.

While some players found this approach exciting, others perceived it as too unpredictable to be truly enjoyable. This feedback led us to rethink the core structure of player actions.

We eventually developed a system based on two distinct actions, each with a limited impact. The key was introducing a cost tied to the height of the stack on which a player’s token was placed—naturally preventing overly powerful moves and keeping the game within a more manageable and readable space.

Each iteration taught us something. Each change brought us closer to understanding what the game wanted to be. And with every test, the feedback kept improving.

Over those two intense days at IDEAG, we went through no fewer than 15 significantly different versions of the game, gradually refining the design until we reached a balance capable of engaging both casual players and more dedicated abstract-game enthusiasts.

A Turning Point

Then something unexpected happened.

We had the chance to show the game to a publisher. They sat down, played a full game… and immediately asked for another. By the end of the second play, they were enthusiastic enough to take a copy of the prototype with them.
Although that collaboration didn’t move forward, it was a defining moment for us. It confirmed that the game wasn’t just working—it was resonating.


Refining the Vision

After IDEAG, we continued developing the prototype. Our goal was to make the game accessible to a wider audience, without losing the depth and the identity we had built through those intense days of iteration.

It was a careful balancing act: simplifying where necessary, but never at the cost of what made the game unique.

Finding the Right Home

In the summer of 2025, we presented Underwood to Reiner from dlp games. We had worked together before, and I had a strong feeling this game would speak to him.

After thorough testing, we reached an agreement.

Reiner and his team brought the game to the next level. Their development work refined and enriched the experience in meaningful ways. In particular, I really appreciate the addition of clearings and trees—elements that weren’t part of our original design. They expand the game’s possibilities and give it a broader, more dynamic feel.

Looking Back

Underwood is the result of a fast start, intense collaboration, and countless iterations. It grew from a stubborn mechanic into a living system, shaped by feedback, experimentation, and shared passion.

Like the forest it represents, it didn’t emerge all at once—but layer by layer, decision by decision, until it became something truly alive.