Editing Wargame Rules
Editing Wargame Rules
New blog post outlining my approach with examples:
https://work.vexillia.me.uk/2020/09/reb ... eased.html
https://work.vexillia.me.uk/2020/09/reb ... eased.html
- levied troop
- Grizzly Madam
- Posts: 3760
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:05 pm
- Location: I’m in the phone box, the one across the hall
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
Having been responsible for a major training design and development project I think there’s some excellent advice there - would that everybody followed it.
One point on repetition, if you use a specific term to describe a rule/action, then always use that term to describe that rule/action. Rules writers aren’t fiction writers who need to come up with different descriptions each time, it confuses the learner.
One point on repetition, if you use a specific term to describe a rule/action, then always use that term to describe that rule/action. Rules writers aren’t fiction writers who need to come up with different descriptions each time, it confuses the learner.
I get lockdown, but I get up again.
- grizzlymc
- Grizzly Madam
- Posts: 9619
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:33 am
- Location: Sunny Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
Hallowed be thy name of melon headed font of wisdom. If it's a cavalry charge, it remains a bloody cavalry charge, not an advance to contact, the charge, advance or anything else. A glossary at the back is handy too.
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
levied troop wrote: ↑Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:20 am One point on repetition, if you use a specific term to describe a rule/action, then always use that term to describe that rule/action. Rules writers aren’t fiction writers who need to come up with different descriptions each time, it confuses the learner.
-
- PurpleBot
- Posts: 776
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:15 pm
- Contact:
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
In EBs version they have removed all references to cavalry charges or indeed any other movement to contract.
-
- Jezebel
- Posts: 3128
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:09 pm
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
Yep - seconded or thirded or whatever.
Rulesets where the same thing is referenced differently are a curse. Classic one is to use a different term for a phase in a turn, from the heading for that chapter about that phase.
Terms that could be synonymous (cavalry vs mounted) pick one, and stick with it, unless there is an actual distinction.
Remember, this is a manual, not a story. It's not meant to be exciting reading. Adjectives don't have many places.
Secondly, make sure you use a single voice (active preferably)throughout.
Group actions/play segments together so you don't find grenades an dgrenade launcher, and the rules for grenades ammunition supply in three different sections.
Check references to 'they', 'them', 'it' - if you must use them, make sure they are crystal clear.
Use the same verb throughout for the same action. Roll/Toss/Throw/whatever a dice.
Make conventions clear up front, expand acronyms on first use, and make sure that expansion is the first glossary reference to that item.
Use markup, colour or other stylistic cues to separate comment, hints, notes and actual instructions. include concrete examples.
Consider whether it makes sense to use numbered sections. It's a pain while editing, but a boon for players and cross referencing.
Importantly.. Dice instructions. Make it consistent wherever possible. If you need to roll a 4 to hit someone, and there's an +1 adjustment for cover, make it clear this means you need to roll a 5. I have seen so many tables in rules with a number where it's not clear how that is applied. It can usually be worked out if it's a factor making things better or worse, but why make players work to understand your rules?
Above all, have it read through by at least two, preferably more, sets of eyes. You will make mistakes/typos etc.
Finally, once you have done that, consider typical game play examples, (firefight, moving in terrain, close combat, ambush etc), and ask someone to try and play through an example, without having ever played the set before. Implicit assumptions or conventions are often missed, and why play testers in your own club or that know you well are less useful.
Rulesets where the same thing is referenced differently are a curse. Classic one is to use a different term for a phase in a turn, from the heading for that chapter about that phase.
Terms that could be synonymous (cavalry vs mounted) pick one, and stick with it, unless there is an actual distinction.
Remember, this is a manual, not a story. It's not meant to be exciting reading. Adjectives don't have many places.
Secondly, make sure you use a single voice (active preferably)throughout.
Group actions/play segments together so you don't find grenades an dgrenade launcher, and the rules for grenades ammunition supply in three different sections.
Check references to 'they', 'them', 'it' - if you must use them, make sure they are crystal clear.
Use the same verb throughout for the same action. Roll/Toss/Throw/whatever a dice.
Make conventions clear up front, expand acronyms on first use, and make sure that expansion is the first glossary reference to that item.
Use markup, colour or other stylistic cues to separate comment, hints, notes and actual instructions. include concrete examples.
Consider whether it makes sense to use numbered sections. It's a pain while editing, but a boon for players and cross referencing.
Importantly.. Dice instructions. Make it consistent wherever possible. If you need to roll a 4 to hit someone, and there's an +1 adjustment for cover, make it clear this means you need to roll a 5. I have seen so many tables in rules with a number where it's not clear how that is applied. It can usually be worked out if it's a factor making things better or worse, but why make players work to understand your rules?
Above all, have it read through by at least two, preferably more, sets of eyes. You will make mistakes/typos etc.
Finally, once you have done that, consider typical game play examples, (firefight, moving in terrain, close combat, ambush etc), and ask someone to try and play through an example, without having ever played the set before. Implicit assumptions or conventions are often missed, and why play testers in your own club or that know you well are less useful.
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
Damn you sir! Just had to change 4 throws to rolls. Still no one's perfect.Shahbahraz wrote: ↑Wed Sep 23, 2020 6:30 pm Use the same verb throughout for the same action. Roll/Toss/Throw/whatever a dice.
- Buff Orpington
- Grizzly Madam
- Posts: 3522
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:26 pm
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
This is starting to remind me of Simplified English.
That was an absolute nightmare. It was developed in order to allow non native English speakers to maintain aircraft like the VC10 throughout the old empire. A term had one meaning ang only one meaning. No room for interpretation or idiomatic nuances. Above meant in a higher position, it did not mean a greater value. So you could find valve A above valve B but you could not check that the battery voltage was above 23.6 volts.
That was an absolute nightmare. It was developed in order to allow non native English speakers to maintain aircraft like the VC10 throughout the old empire. A term had one meaning ang only one meaning. No room for interpretation or idiomatic nuances. Above meant in a higher position, it did not mean a greater value. So you could find valve A above valve B but you could not check that the battery voltage was above 23.6 volts.
I know when to go out
I know when to stay in
Get things done
I know when to stay in
Get things done
- Buff Orpington
- Grizzly Madam
- Posts: 3522
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:26 pm
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
Of course the Americans bolloxed everything up by producing the 707.
I know when to go out
I know when to stay in
Get things done
I know when to stay in
Get things done
-
- Jezebel
- Posts: 3128
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:09 pm
Re: Editing Wargame Rules
I loved the campaign for Plain English, not so extreme, but I used it to beat public servants with when I built and ran websites for some major agencies. They all seemed to want to write in turgid gobbledygook, sounding like a Queensland copper on the witness stand. "I observed the individual, heretofore at the present time attendant in the court your honour, proceeding along the footpath in a westerly direction at some speed.."