 http://bit.ly/1UQ3tdm Good Day Internet! Today we’re going to discuss our top 7 tips on editing your rulebook. We’ve tried to tailor this list to focus on tabletop rulebook specific editing, but of course we can’t ignore good old editing practices. We’ll go over what to look for, and what you can do about it to make sure these mistakes don’t make it through to your final rulebook. Use Board-Game-Specific Terminology While trying to be as specific and detailed as possible, new(er) board game designers sometimes forget there’s common board game terminology they can use to simplify their rules. We’ve seen designers write multiple sentences on the step by step procedure on how to shuffle cards when the deck runs out. This, of course, is unnecessary. You need to recognize what common terms in board gaming players are going to understand without further explanation and then only explain what differs from that standard. To give a clearer example of what simple board game terminology is think of the games you played when you were little: Candy Land, Connect 4, Chutes and Ladders. Those instructions are simple enough for kids to learn (roll and move, shuffle, tallying methods) that they became common board and card terminology in later years (they’ve also been around forever), so remember to consider this when writing your rules.  http://bit.ly/1UQ4q5D Avoid Unspecific Pronouns You need to be absolutely certain when using pronouns (you, it, one, that, they, each, few, many, who, whoever, whose, etc.) in your rulebook that they can only be interpreted as referring to a single noun. You should always identify which nouns are within the sentence with the pronoun and in the previous sentence to make sure that pronoun can be used without confusion. Remember as well that one type of component (for instance, a particular type of card) can have multiple locations in game (in hand, in a market, on the board, in the discard pile, etc.). So even if it’s clear that the pronoun refers to a single game component, it may not be clear in what location that game component is (see our Tsuro example from last week’s blog). In general, it’s usually better using the noun or proper noun instead of a pronoun because then there’s no confusion or room from misinterpretation on behalf of the reader. Also, don’t forget about those old editing techniques you learned in high school or other secondary institutions--don’t start a sentence with “and”, “this”, “that”; never use the word “thing” or “something”; that sort of stuff. Appropriate Tone In general, we suggest that you don’t use comical or conversational writing in your rulebook. It usually unnecessarily increases the length of the rules and can decrease clarity (both bad things). Of course, it depends on the type of game you’re making though. Your rulebook should be written more as an instructional so that it gets the point across clearly in the fewest words possible. The only time you may want to include something like a comical tone in a rulebook is if it adds to the theme of the game. Even so, writing in a comical or conversational tone usually works better when you have a shorter rulebook. Players want to play your game, not read your rulebook. If you increase the time between learning the game and playing, your players won’t be impressed. Therefore, it’s best to stick with a tone that informs and instructs with authority to get players up and running with your game as quick as possible.  http://bit.ly/21joqlU Write in Second (not Third) Person You should be writing as if you’re speaking directly to the reader; using terms like “you” and “your” instead of “a player” or “their”. It makes the rules more personal and assists in reader comprehension and retention. If players actually see themselves playing the game when reading the rules, they’ll be more interested and involved in reading them. Formatting Consistency The general rule for formatting is if you’ve done it once, you need to do it all the way through. If you put a component in quotations, you need to do it for every other component throughout the rulebook. Your formatting consistency is going to assist in players understanding what you’re talking about in addition to making your rulebook easier to read. The same goes for overall rulebook format--group things together (or put things near each other) that are connected to one another. Part of editing means considering flow of the rulebook, how much you have to flip through pages and how many questions can be almost immediately answered by the rules. Have Multiple Sets of Eyes Edit This is mostly to make sure that mistakes aren’t missed, but it’s also important for making sure the style and tone (as previously mentioned) is appropriate. Different editors like certain things done different ways, and you want to make sure that your editor’s bias or preference (or your own) towards a certain style or tone doesn’t conflict with what’s best for your rulebook. Every single person interprets every single thing differently--so although you might think you’re being professional and forward, others might think you are being passive and not explaining things fully. Basically, two editors is better than one.  http://bit.ly/1Uh1MbJ Print It Out and Read Aloud
Both of these steps help to ensure you don’t miss anything in the editing process. As humans, we have a tendency to skim over words when we’re editing a familiar piece and that is magnified when you read off a computer screen and in your head. When you print out your rules and read aloud, you may notice you’ve left out a word that hasn’t been caught the first ten times you went over your rulebook. Other things you may want to consider when reading aloud: does it flow? Does the order make sense? Can you actually read this without tripping over the words? Other tips to help ensure you don’t miss anything are reading your rulebook backwards or changing the font. These tips trick your brain into thinking you’re reading something new so you don’t skim ahead. By following these 7 tips, you’ll be able to greatly improve the quality of your rulebook, as well as constructively critique other rulebooks. That’s it for this week. I’d like to thank Allysha for telling me what I was supposed to include in this blog post (and for editing my occasionally lackluster writing every week). Next week, we’ll do a post on things that don’t require me to bother Allysha so much as she’ll be studying for her Summer exams ;) Thanks for dropping by! If you have any questions or comments, please leave them below. You can also find us on Facebook and Twitter. Take Care! Kevin
3 Comments
 http://bit.ly/214DN1r Good Day Internet! Today we’re going to discuss what to do, and what not to do, when writing your rulebook and why. Go ahead and grab a drink and a snack--it’s gonna be a long one (we examined sections of 7 different rulebooks all for you)! If you haven’t been following us for that long, or don’t remember, we did a blog post before on Intro to Rulebook Writing. If you haven’t read that post, we suggest you start there before continuing on. We have a lot of ground to cover, so let’s get moving with our first topic: TOPIC 1 -- Order of Operations/Consistency in Train of Thought Our first blog post on rulebooks focused on what the layout of a rulebook should be. This first point focuses on making sure that layout is followed, the sections themselves flow well, and that the transition between sections is smooth. Dead of Winter - Thumbs Up We recently played Dead of Winter and were pretty impressed by the rulebook. Overall, the game was easy to learn because the rulebook was easy to navigate and reference in game. The layout and flow were exceptional, as best illustrated by the “Rolling For Exposure” section (page 11) and related sections. "Rolling for Exposure" occurs after attacking a zombie or moving a survivor to a new location. The section is located after explaining both the “Actions that require an Action Die” (including "Attack") and the “Actions that do not require an Action Die” (including "Move a Survivor"). Both the "Attack" and "Move a Survivor" sections reference "Rolling for Exposure" (including the page number in the "Attack" section), which is fantastic for navigating the rulebook. Attacking examples are done immediately after the "Attack" section and partially show how "Rolling for Exposure" works. Although it jumps ahead, it makes complete sense to put it there instead of waiting to explain "Rolling for Exposure" and then showing an attack example. The "Rolling for Exposure" section reiterates when the roll is made (making it easy to reference in game) and lists the 4 possible results/effects. The last one mentioned is “Bitten” in which “the survivor is killed and the bite effect spreads”. The next subsection immediately after that line is “Spreading a Bite Effect”. You may be thinking that’s not a big deal, but we’ve seen rulebooks where the one action/effect etc. that requires further explanation is in the middle of the list and it disrupts the flow and train of thought of the reader because it leaves a question unanswered. Having an unanswered question creates noise in a reader’s mind which may reduce their understanding of the rules. Placing the “Bitten” effect at the end of the list to make the smooth transition into “Spreading a Bite Effect” does wonders for the reader’s train of thought. It doesn’t give space for the reader to ask any questions and gives them instant satisfaction, which in turn gives them peace of mind.  http://bit.ly/1tdI5cu Last Night on Earth - Thumbs Down The Last Night on Earth rules are probably some of the most frustrating I have ever read. Rules and entire sections are consistently misplaced and out of order, things that don’t need further explanation (like how you should thoroughly shuffle the cards before each game) are reiterated multiple times while more complex situations are explained once, page references are non-existent, the “Game Components” and “Card Types” sections aimlessly blab about different components (often saying they’ll actually explain them later), and there are a high number of grammar and punctuation mistakes. For the sake of this blog post though, we’re going to focus on the inconsistency of language, train of thought, and proper order of this rulebook. On page 9 of the rulebook, the second and third sentences of “The Game Round” sections read: “During the Zombie Turn, the Zombie player(s) get to move and attack with their Zombies as well as possibly spawn new Zombies. During the Hero Turn, each Hero gets to take their actions, in any character order they wish.” The first sentence describes what the Zombie player(s) get to do on their turn. The second sentence describes how the Hero player(s) takes their turns. These are two completely different thoughts and sections. The what belongs there since the first part of “The Game Round” should be an overview of the turns. On the other hand, the how belongs later under “The Hero Turn” when describing the specifics of a turn. As we can see, this inconsistency in train of thought is actually a result of improperly dividing up rulebook sections and subsections.  http://bit.ly/28gQxaN TOPIC 2 -- Being Assertive with Word Choice When writing rules you have to be a straightforward and clear. The reader must understand exactly what you are talking about without question. There is no room for interpretation in rules so word choice must be assertive as to remove all doubt. Shadows over Camelot - Thumbs Up The second paragraph of “Moving to a new Quest” (page 12) in the rules for Shadows over Camelot reads: “To travel, simply grab your Knight’s miniature and move it to any destination Quest of your choice. The distance between your Quest of origin and the destination, and the relative position of these Quests on the map is irrelevant. Each move always requires a single Heroic Action”. This language is clear and there is no room for misinterpretation. As a player, you know how to move, where you can move, and how many actions it costs. The second sentence is a little unnecessary, however, it removes any doubt that distance matters in determining how many actions it takes to move and it goes along with conversational tone of the rulebook. Still, the rule would have been clear without it. But the first sentence is an excellent example. Clear, concise, to the point. For an even better example, take a look at the first couple paragraphs of the “Make an Attack” section (page 13) in the Betrayal at the House on the Hill rulebook. We didn’t include it here because we wanted a more condensed example, but it’s top notch in terms of writing and word choice.  http://bit.ly/1Yca33z Tsuro - Thumbs Down In the rules for Tsuro, the first sentence under the “Draw Tiles” section states: “For the first few turns of the game (or throughout a two-player game), only the active player draws a path tile from the draw pile, replacing the one he or she played that turn”. The ending of this sentence “replacing the one he or she played that turn”, can be interpreted two ways: The drawn tile replaces the played tile’s spot in the active player’s hand, or; The played tile is removed from the board and replaced with the newly drawn tile. Most players will assume the first, but they shouldn’t have to assume what the rules are. That ending is completely unnecessary and the rule would be clearer without it. An even better option would be replacing it with “at the end of their turn” to reaffirm when the action takes place, adding clarity to the rules.  http://bit.ly/1UDaHEg TOPIC 3 -- Properly Grouping Information (Especially Edge Cases) We’ve kind of gone over this already in the first topic focusing on Order of Operations. However, this is section is going to focus more on where the information is put rather than how it’s divided up and the flow of the rules. Relevant information all in one place ensures navigating the rulebook during play is simple. Bora Bora does a good job of this in their “Expand action (via land path or water path)” section (page 4). Bora Bora - Thumbs Up The “Expand" action section not only explains the action, but also how it ties into the “Woman/Man” action, what other action is only available when you expand, and the edge cases (we should also mention that on the side of each page is a rules summary--an incredible reference tool during gameplay!). Scoring victory points for the adjacent fish tile (the other action only available when you expand) is the only part that requires you to look in another section. However, if you went to refer to the “Expand” action section in game, you would see this is the only time you can score fish tiles and that it has something to do with the “Red God” (that section and associated page number is referred to in the paragraph), which should trigger your memory. If it doesn’t, the page number is there for you so you can easily flip to that section and figure it out. Additionally, having the edge cases included, telling you what happens when a hut is already on the region you expand to and that no player can have more than one hut per region adds to the section’s comprehensiveness. Beyond the “Red God” section there is no question players could have about the "Expand" action that isn’t covered in that section. That’s exactly as it should be because if a player wants to look up what a certain God does, they should be able to refer to a God card section and not have to guess what that God could possibly do to figure out what action section to start skimming.  http://bit.ly/214EBDB Axis & Allies: WWI 1914 - Thumbs Down
An example of why not putting all the relevant information for an edge case in one place is a poor choice is the “United States Isolationism” rules (page 12) in Axis & Allies: WWI 1914. "United States Isolationism" rules state that for the first three turns of the game the United States is neutral with Allied sympathies and on the 4th turn they enter the war as part of the Allies. If attacked before the 4th turn, they enter the war on that turn. Basically, they can’t be the aggressor until they are attacked or until the beginning of their 4th turn. Until then they are “neutral with Allied sympathies”. Those rules are fine and dandy, but it doesn’t explain at all how the Central Powers are to treat the United States during its isolationism time. What happens if before the 4th turn a Central Power wants to move through a space solely occupied by United States units? The United States is technically not hostile towards the Central Powers yet so can the Central Power pretend they’re not there? Or is that considered an attack? And what about if an Allied force wants to move into that space? Technically the United States isn’t friendly towards the Allied forces yet either so are Allied units allowed to move into that space at all? These questions come down to figuring what “neutral with Allied sympathies” means in terms of hostility towards the Central Powers and friendliness towards Allied Powers. Somewhere from page 11-23 of the rulebook lies the answer, and quite frankly, our group still debates this topic. To make matters worse, the answer changes depending whether the units are located on land or in sea because they have different combat and movement rules. Despite this, some of the information is combined in sections and others are separated. Needless to say, it’s a helluva annoying experience not being able to make it past the third turn without having to stop play, thoroughly analyze the rulebook, and debate the interpretation(s). If the "United States Isolationism" section was expanded to include all of that information, there would be no problems, and we would be easily able to reference it in game (instead of gallivanting around the rulebook). Although we’ve pointed out some flaws in a few rulebooks, we still play and recommend these games to others (Tsuro and Axis & Allies: WWI 1914 are some of my favourites). A flawed rulebook doesn’t mean a flawed game. It just means it sometimes causes frustration and confusion when first learning and playing a game. That’s it for this week. Join us next week when we most likely don’t talk about rules (no guarantees). By the way, did you know editing is kind of what we do? Well, it’s what Allysha does and Kevin dabbles. If you’re only looking for some quick tips though, feel free to ask :) Thanks for dropping by! If you have any questions or comments, please leave them below. You can also find us on Facebook and Twitter. Take Care! Kevin  http://bit.ly/1ZzkHzQ Good Day Internet! Today we’re continuing our preparation for external playtesting with the rulebook. There are two main reasons you should have a basic rulebook prepared for external playtesting: The first reason being if you forget what happens in a specific situation, or forget which version of a rule (or rules) you’re playtesting, you have a reference to go back to. You may think that seems a little silly (me? Forget the rules to my own game?!? Yeah, right), but it does happen. You have to remember that your game is constantly changing and there’s a chance you accidentally use an old obsolete rule (I can attest to this happening to me). The other time this usually happens (or to me at least) is when an edge case comes up. Although you may have written the rule for it long time ago, remembering what it is is difficult because it doesn’t happen every game (it’s an edge case for a reason). So despite how fantastic of a memory you have--or think you may have--having a rulebook so you don’t forget your own rules is important. The second reason is if you have a designer team: the rulebook will help to keep you all on the same page as to what rules are being played with (ask Allysha how many times I’ve caused her agony by not explicitly telling her what rules we’re playtesting with). This will also aid in making your explanation of the rules smoother when you go to playtest as you both will know what needs to be said. Alright, so maybe you’ve never written any sort of rulebook, how-to, or any other kind of instructional before and want to know: What should it look like? Good question. :) To begin this discussion, we need to go over the purposes of a rulebook. The two main purposes are to: 1. teach new players how to play your game and; 2. act as a reference guide to experienced players (for further discussion on this topic checkout this video by Gil Hova from Metatopia 2015 featuring himself and Geoff Engelstein). The below format serves both of those purposes. It presents the game in a way that makes it easy to learn to new players (giving the overview and flow of the game before going into the specifics), while additional subheadings make it easier to navigate for experienced players. This is the format we always use when initially writing out a set of rules.  http://bit.ly/1T88a4H Intro/Overview: Your background story/recap on what situation the players are getting themselves into. It sets the scene (thematically, usually) for the entire game. Components: This isn’t so important for playtesters at this point, but is important for the final rulebook and print and plays (PnP). This way players (including yourself) know whether or not there are missing pieces, or in the case of PnP players, if they have everything they need in order to play. Objective: What the players are trying to accomplish. It should also make it clear how players are competing (free-for-all, teams, cooperative, etc.). This is the more technical/mechanical explanation of the 'Overview'. For example: “To be the last player with multiple spaceships orbiting the black hole”. Setup: How to get the game ready for play. There shouldn’t be anything in here that mentions what components are used for or why they are important--save that for the 'Gameplay' section. Just make sure that in this section everything is laid out clearly--if diagrams are necessary (they almost always are) don’t be afraid to put those in!  http://bit.ly/1Wm3yfl Gameplay: The main gameplay section tells you how the game is broken up (rounds, turns, phases, etc.) and summarizes what players do in each of those stages. This section should explain the flow of the game from start to completion.
Once that’s done, you go into the gameplay specifics, which should be explained in the order in which they occur in game. This is where you explain exactly what happens during each turn, action, round, etc. You also should have sections dedicated to complicated subjects and their edge cases (for instance, our section on Collisions for “Pulled into Darkness”). One game which Allysha feels does a decent job of explaining its different gameplay sections and exceptions is the original Yu-Gi-Oh Trading Card Game (TCG). It lays everything out in a particular order for easy learning, but it can also be navigated easily during gameplay. Game End Conditions: What initiates the end game (ie. once the last card is drawn, at the end of the fourth round etc.), when the game is actually over (ie. each player gets one more turn--including the player who drew the last card), how players tally their points, and restate what the victory requirement is/who wins. Following this guideline should give you a rulebook that is easy to use for new players while not leaving experienced players utterly frustrated. You may have to customize this layout for your game and include additional sections (like a glossary of icons, or card anatomy) for the final rulebook, but this format will serve well for any game. It’s always good to start with the outline first to make sure you have everything covered and know what may need it’s own section. There’s a lot more to rulebooks than this, but now is not the time for that. Hopefully, I can get Allysha to do the next one (on rulebook specifics and editing) as a “guest post”. Thanks for dropping by! If you have any questions or comments, please leave them below. You can also find us on Facebook and Twitter. Take Care! Kevin |
Kevin CarmichaelBoard game designer and developer discussing the ins and outs of game design. 
Archives
June 2018
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
|
|
Copyright © 2016