Game Design #115: Rulebooks, Referees & VAR (Part B)

A good rulebook (like a referee) should be seen and not heard, but keep the game flowing smoothly. 

Or - the rules should be such as to require minimal consultation. There should be no complex tables that force you to flip open the book each combat phase. There should be few modifiers and special rules - so you can remember them after a single play through.  The special; rules interactions should not spawn extra complications. Like a referee, the less you see of a rulebook: the better it is doing its job.

But unless the rules are extremely simple, VAR (the rulebook) will be required at some stage. In this case the VAR check should be accurate and quick - allowing us to quickly get back to the game. With minimal paging back and forth, squinting in puzzlement, arguing etc. VAR (aka consulting the rules) should be over fast - and everyone then understands what is going on. Accessible, fast, easy, obvious. 

Part B:  Rulebooks should be easy and fast to use and understand. 

A well laid out rulebook allows you to use more complex mechanics and concepts. I can teach algebra rather easily to 8-9 year olds if it is kept simple, clear and broken into chunks.  With a clear, well delivered rulebook you can 'get away with more' - consulting the rules more often is less a problem if the consultation is a fast, simple, painless experience. Flawed rules are less an issue when the referee is really fast and good at his job of explaining them.

Rules must be easy to find. Index, Appendix, Quick Reference = Mandatory

This means an index in the front, appendix in the back, and a quick play/reference section in the back you can photocopy.  It ain't new. It ain't complicated. If the rulebook is a pdf, the appendix and index should be bookmarked so when you click on an index topic, you are sent to the right place.  Anything else is just laziness or poor editing oversight

E.g. I like the idea of Weird War I. A War Transformed has many charts, and tables needed to resolve combat. It uses a range of dice mechanics. OK, according to Part A, not ideal... ...but no glossary, index or quickplay for a 200+ page rulebook? That compounds the problem. 

A quick reference chart with all the key rules and mechanics you need each turn is a must. It should preferably fit on a single A4 sheet so it can be taken in 'at a glance.'

 

 A table of contents and index are mandatory. Surprisingly, some of the best indexed are from the fanmade living rulebooks like Necrodamus or BFG.

Corollary: Unit stats and special rules should also be easy to use, find and share

This is not just the rulebook but encompasses unit and faction cards which are laid out on the table where your opponent can glance over and see them, or pick them up and check them for a few seconds. 

I have a personal rule that all my homebrew games' special rules for all factions should also fit on a back to back A4 (i.e. 2 pages max) so I can print them all out easily. Obviously that doesn't work for everything but it's fair to say unit cards should be easily read, visible and understood by opponents; preferably with summaries of any applicable 'special rules' aka rules exceptions to minimize interaction with the rulebook. I've been experimenting with an "army sheet" - where all units stats, weapon stats and special rules/skills/trait summaries are all combined on one sheet of paper.

There should be no hidden knowledge. Rules should be generic if possible and shared by all. Unique, faction-only skills should be minimized. I shouldn't need to own a special rulebook to know what my opponents' units can do.  

While handy, these tabletop unit cards also have an implicit limit; if you need to have a hundred information cards piled on the table... ....has an underlying rulebook issue just been shifted elsewhere? Another consideration I wrestle with: For a unit card - like a PowerPoint slide - how much information is too much?

 With tabletop unit cards, the question is: what is too much information? I like it when all you (or your opponent) needs to know can fit on 1 or 2 sides of A4.

 

 Quar rules manage it in three pages per faction but they do include vehicles.... so acceptable enough I suppose...

Rules should also be logically laid out.

Finding a rule should not be like a game of hide and seek. I should find shooting in the shooting chapter, movement in the movement section. Following traditional layouts is good. Perhaps the chapters are in order each phase appears in a game turn? Logic is good. 

Duplication is better than playing hide and seek with rules. Sometimes it may be necessary to repeat rules, but that's OK. Maybe damage rules get repeated in shooting and melee. Or movement in the terrain section. Or morale appears in a few places. I'd rather find a rule too often, then not at all. 

There's room in the word count, because a good rulebook won't be filled with excess fluff and random stories. Right?

The oldschool Starfleet Battles/WRG format is very precisely laid out and well indexed but can be a little dry and mind numbing.... some pictures to break up the wall of text would be nice!
 

Rules should not require viewing Youtube how-to-plays to make sense

Pretty much as per the title. If a rulebook does not make sense without having to go to outside the rules and watch video tutorials - then the rules just suck and need to be rewritten.  Period. I shouldn't need to watch an hour of Youtube tutorials for a game to make sense. And the rulebook certainly shouldn't be being sold for money....

Rules should not use unique language or symbols

Many rules mistakenly try to rename common conventions to...   appear hip?   I mean, movement, fight/melee, shoot, damage, morale - these are pretty commonly understood.  My poster child is Killwager.

You have measures, targeted measures, trained measures, technical measures, free measures, reactive measures. You can dip! and your minis have flow.  The game sequence goes:

 

This sequence (or even what a measure is) will probably not be perfectly clear to someone picking up the rulebook for the first time. Familiarity with other games doesn't necessarily help. Renaming actions etc is needless complication. Keep it simple. Keep it oldschool. We're playing games with toy soldiers ffs. We don't need to feel trendy and have hipster phrasing. (The follow-up game, BLKOUT went back to more traditional wording and looks to be a much bigger success)

Another gaffe is using lots special symbols instead of just... words. Words like shoot, fight, etc aren't that long as to require replacing with a symbol. The symbol is just another thing to learn. Worse is when the symbols are embedded throughout the rules instead of restricted to unit cards (like the Warcry example above). Like this:

 

If you have to look up the rules even a few times to work out the symbol - then that's another piece of rulebook interference that slows the game. When your rules are 250+ pages long, the word count obviously wasn't the issue. It's a little unfair to pick on Lancer as it is a quasi-RPG combat game, but I had the pdf handy. While I've got it open:

 

 Not all unit cards are equal. If your unit profile goes for four pages... it's probably not table-friendly!

Rules should not be hidden among the lore/fluff/waffle.

Sometimes I have to read 30 pages of fluff before I get to the actual rules (or 150 *cough* Carnevale *cough*). Sometimes the rules are hidden, sandwiched amongst the fluff - i.e. 5-6 pages of lore waffle, and 5-6 pages of rules, like my old Malifaux rules. 

This slows the VAR decision. The ref rules needs to do its job, not deliver a Shakespearean monologue.   

A picture is worth 100 words. Mark Borg, Trench Crusade, Necropolis prove - the art or cool mini photos can do a lot of the heavy lifting. Heck just the front cover of Space Weirdos gives a truckload of vibes. 

So give us the pictures, and spare us the 1000 words. 

Or do a separate lore/art/fluff book if you insist - like Infinity and Trench Crusade have done. Then, those who want to enjoy a lore deep dive or have a glossy hard copy, can. Those who just want to be able to easily and quickly access rules - they win as well. 

The rules' ease-of-use should not be neglected just so the author can waffle about their game world. 

Carnevale has great art and atmosphere. Assassins, vampires and cthulhu in the canals of Venice. Pity there's 150 pages before I can actually read the rules needed to play the game...

Diagrams, Pictures & Examples are good

Diagrams are good. Examples and photos of gameplay are good. Not all of us has a mate to teach us the game, or can get to a demo game. If you can't explain something succinctly without taking your hands out of your pockets, then it probably needs a diagram (unless you are Italian).

Corollary: However if a single game concept needs pages and pages of diagrams to explain a concept.... perhaps the rules themselves need simplifying and clarifying. 

While I'm not a fan of hitpoints on humans, Necropolis is a nifty free game in playtesting. The art style is very evocative and has spawned some great display boards. It avoids 150 pages of fluff and still has vibes.

 

While nowhere near as good as the lovely art in the O.G. Songs of Our Ancestors, the free new Quar rules also show distinct atmosphere without much text.

The rest is pretty commonsense... 

Format, Layout & Font

A sterotypical wargamer is a middle aged male. Our eyesight is usually not optimal. So.... paragraphs, pictures, decent font size thanks! Break up those walls of text. Take pity on middle aged eyes! While I do feel for those Osprey blue book authors struggling with a page count/cap, I shouldn't have aching eyes from reading a wall of text.

Editing & Spelling

You'd hardly think it need be said, but this is surprisingly common. Terrible spelling, grammar and proofreading can be surprisingly jarring and break your focus on the rules. 

After marking a lot of schoolwork, I know the author is the worst proofreader. Our brain "fills in" what it thinks it said or intended.  Likewise a spouse/best mate/gaming partner are also not optimal - they might easily "grasp" something that they already know about from other discussions; so it still makes sense to them: but an outside reader would be throwing their hands in the air. 

To summarise:

PART A 

The analogy is that if VAR or the referee interferes in a football game too often, it is a bad thing. The game cannot flow. A good game is where the referee does its job unobtrusively and barely seems present.

Likewise, a set of rules, like the referee, should be unobtrusive and not require frequent referencing. Therefore, things like many special rules, tables, lots of range bands and modifiers - anything that will require you to refer to the rules more often - should be minimized or avoided when designing a game, to reduce/minimize the chance of referee (aka rulebook) interference.

PART B

If the rulebook (aka referee or VAR) is required, then the process should be as quick, simple and smooth as possible - not a long drawn out or difficult process. 

This means making the rulebook as accessible and readable as possible. Things like indexes, table of contents, quick play sheets should be mandatory - making rules quick to find and share. Excessive lore text should not obfuscate the actual rules. Unique language and symbols should be eschewed for common and familiar words and terms. Youtube tutorials cannot be used as a crutch - the rulebook should be able to stand on its own merits. 

When recourse to the rulebook/rules are needed, it should be a quick and clear process allowing you to quickly get back to the core business - making pew-pewing noises while swooshing around toy soldiers....