|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 14, 2015 20:02:21 GMT
**Edit** Rulebook Version 4Here is the first draft of the rule book that will be included with the game. It might not make much sense without having the physical cards in front of you, but gives an idea of how it plays. It's still W.I.P. so needs a bunch more work (Like different art for the cover) but it's roughly what we are wanting for the final version.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Oct 14, 2015 20:16:13 GMT
Any typos, spelling mistakes or things that don't make sense please let us know! We want to try to catch all mistakes before it goes into print.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 14, 2015 21:18:27 GMT
Will do.
EDIT: Rulebook not working for me. Link is "not found"
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 14, 2015 21:22:41 GMT
I literally just updated the link should work now!
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Oct 14, 2015 23:45:30 GMT
I've sent Red Ned a new cover picture, so that should get updated for a new version soon.
I will give 100 harko points for each typo people can find!
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 15, 2015 10:26:43 GMT
"Only one people can be victorious from the CLASH OF NATIONS" (bot p2) Eh, "from" mightn't be the best choice. "in" maybe?
Bot Page 5: The Sovereign symbol bit. The first sentence ends in what seems a weird way. "how many sovereigns." How many sovereigns what? It just seems disjointed.
Page 7: Ano-Chee. The last sentence about "however the Ano-Chee view outsiders to be ignorant and filthy savages" might be able to use a comma. Just reads awkwardly.
Ivos. You missed the "they are the most awesome race" part. Also, "adversaries" seems slightly bolded for some reason. Additionally, the section about Galmonion's Wall might need touching up. "...the most famous of which is Galmonion's Wall that separates..." As odd as it might be to use "which" twice, it feels like it should be "Galmonion's Wall, which separates..."
Junlocks. First line, it says "The Junlock are a tribal people..." should it be plural? "The Junlocks are a tribal people..."?
Tsung-Dao. "Peaceful and content, they believe in routine above all else((,) or (and)) enjoying the simple joys of work." ((possible corrections in brackets)) Also. Enjoying the simple joys?
Zadakine: "They place great value on paying debts and seeking revenge on those who wrong their families" I know Zadakine have large families, but should "families" be plural in this case? I mean, this might partially be a problem with Zadakine being... difficult to know if it is plural or not.
Page 8: The "golden ring" mentioned in the opening paragraph doesn't appear to be a "ring" but an "outline" or "rectangle."
"If there are less than four players, choose a number of ((additional)) Nation Decks to make ((raise)) the total number of Nation Decks to four, shuffle them and place them face down in the Roster."
You also might consider calling the "Roster" the "Roster zone" I suppose.
Page 9: Hisss... The Mariner. (nothing wrong here, just noticed him)
Page 10: on page 8 you mentioned the Turn Order. It is good to repeat, but on page 10 you bold it. Consider bolding it on both pages for consistency?
Page 12: "Guile Challenges are often more covert than other challenges, whether the aim is to assassinate their foes or conduct a shady business deal..." ((their foes? The foe of the challenges? could also be singular "to assassinate a foe or conduct a"))
"Also ranges to..."?
"(Damage can reduce a Units((Unit's)) abilities and make it unable to Support or Oppose..."
"Take your Unit and place it in front of that Challenge to show that ((it)) is Supporting and on the opposite side to show that it is Opposing"
"Assign Events ((Assign Event Cards)) remain attached to the Unit for the entire turn, but are discarded from play when the Unit leaves the Challenge, is Stunned or when the turn end"
More later...
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 15, 2015 15:21:44 GMT
Wow, awesome stuff! It's a good job you have eagle eyes, writing isn't my strong point so this is riddled with errors. I fixed those problems (I can upload the new version). A lot of the descriptions were done at the last minute so are a bit scrappy – lots of the race description stuff is paraphrased from the website descriptions. I renamed the golden ring in the starting champion's border as a golden trim, which is probably more accurate? ( This frame is what inspired them) I redid the sovereign symbol description (I added that last minute because I figured it would need explaining!). I think 'The Roster' is okay, rather than referencing zones. We have always just referred to 'The Roster' as being the race decks and its not something that comes up in the game anyway. Dunno though, maybe calling things zones is a good idea. Here's the redone race descriptions: Ano Chee re-write: "Though regarded by many nations as barbaric, the Ano-Chee themselves view ousiders to be ignorant and filthy savages." Ivos re-write: "Their skilled artisans build many great monuments, the most famous of which is Galmonian's Wall. This wall seperates the lands of the Ivos from Junlocks, their main adversaries." Tsung-Dao re-write: "Peaceful and content, they believe in routine above all else and appreciate the simple joys of hard work." **EDIT** I just updated the rulebook link to the new version
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 15, 2015 19:00:45 GMT
Awesome. I'll get back to reading the next few pages.
Yeah, "zone" isn't a necessary change at all, just something that struck me as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Oct 15, 2015 20:14:42 GMT
Great work, Canuovea! Someone has earned their Harko-points!
Keep checking for typos or possible improvements!
What did you think of the general look of it? Does the layout etc all seem relatively clear? I know how to play the game already so its hard for me to judge.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 15, 2015 20:32:38 GMT
I'll finish up reading it and all that, but I'll also get someone who is essentially not into Harkovast at all to take a look at it and tell me what they think of the format and such of the book.
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 15, 2015 21:01:41 GMT
Nice The layout is a bit 'flat' at the moment. I didn't do any popout boxes or anything for example sections which I could do to separate them a bit more, and I didn't put the images (like the cards) in little boxes I just plonked them on the page. I also used the divider between sections, which is the same I use on the cards, a lot which may make the pages look a bit too similar. Here is a couple of Fantasy Flight rulebooks that are essentially the same thing: Game of Thrones Card GameNetrunner Card GameYou can see I was influenced a lot of the style/layout from them - they are the industry leader at this after all. But really most card games rules are laid out this way nowadays. One thing I tried to do was keep everything as compact and concise as possible to keep production costs down. This means less random images and more text crammed on a page rather than making everything more spaced out, so that may make it harder to understand? I dunno.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 15, 2015 22:42:57 GMT
In some cases the cards appear a bit small, but then again, it is kinda necessary to lay out the examples.
Page 13: Locking out a challenge seems a little unclear to me. I'm assuming it means that we just can't add anything else to that challenge? What if someone is attacked and it brings the total to below 20? Does that mean someone else can toss something in?
Page 14: "After the Defending player chooses whether to play a Battle Event or not, the Batle is resolved" Typo, missing a t. Should be Battle.
"Like Attacking Battle Events, the defender’s Battle Event is discarded after the Battle and DOES NOT remain in play..." Shouldn't it be something like "Like Attacking Battle Events, Defending Battle Events..." or "like the attacker's Battle Events, the defender's Battle Event is..."? Consistency in both description and capitalization between the two?
Page 15:
Do Ashalites just tend to have female warriors? The example with Tade a bit earlier confused me. I wasn't sure if Tade was female or the player playing Tade was.
I'm also pleased to learn that if you're in the challenge you can attack.
Page 16: Wait wait wait. So what if I attack with a unit that is already in that challenge? They still have their event cards and count as supporting the challenge, yes?
Okay, I'll do more later, have to head out now.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Oct 15, 2015 22:46:31 GMT
Tade is female. Ashalite Guards can be either gender.
Once units are in a challenge they can't take another action. I think that needs to be clarified.
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Oct 15, 2015 22:55:39 GMT
HAHAHAHA just realised Red Ned missed a vital NOT from a sentence in the rules! Canuovea you just saved the came from completely utterly sucking.
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 15, 2015 23:14:47 GMT
The cards in the rulebook are about half the size of cards in real life (The pages are quite big so it should be easy to read in person).
Locking Challenges is because we didnt want you to go over 20 and use two D20s. The Challenge is meant to resolve with 20 support (or opposition), ignoring anything that may affect it later in the turn. I'll make it a little clearer.
I fixed the grammar errors in the Battle section. Good spot.
I can change any reference to a card as 'It' to make it clear when talking about a card?
"Tade has a Guile score of 3, so deals 3 damage to Thundercloud. The ‘Warrior’ Event gives Tade +1 Weapon, meaning it deals an additional 1 damage, increasing the total to 4.
You caught a BIG BIG slip up in the attacking section! I missed a little teeny tiny 'not' in the sentence:
"You may Attack with a Unit that is Exerted or already in a Challenge."
It should be "you may NOT attack". I changed it AND bolded it. Whoops!
|
|