|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 20, 2015 21:43:48 GMT
Okay, it took me a while, but we did a bit of an overhaul of the rules. Its pretty similar but has more stuff clarifying the rules so should be easier to understand: Rulebook Version 2 **EDIT** Rulebook Version 4A few things that need doing/changing: The names of you guys who are helping aren't added to the credits yet. The Contents/index page numbers are wrong. I want to do that when its all finished. The Component Overview picture of the Reference card is a Golta card - I haven't done those yet. There's no layout of the Experience cards, I could add that. We should probably add the FAQ section back in (i took it out for space). Also an explanation of the comic with links and pictures.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2015 23:13:11 GMT
Random thoughts: - Current language surrounding sovereign coins is confusing. Sometimes they are referred to as "sovereign coins" other times just "Sovereigns." (i.e., "The white sovereign coins are worth 5 sovereigns.") I would state the values of them more directly or in bold or something.
- Listing the action phase items on page 10, having them numbered instead of just bullet points makes it look like you have to all of those things in order, at first glance.
- Overall it could benefit from having different header sizes for different sections. Each game play step should have a larger header than the headers that describe specific sub actions of that set. On page 4, the header "4 - Action Phase" has the header size as the headers describing the actions that can be taken in that step. By the time you reach game play step 5, with the header "5 - Resolve challenges" it's easy to get that mixed up with the sub-headers of step 4 as it currently stands.
- The FAQ could probably benefit from it's own page.
- The book might benefit from a cheat-sheet type page. Something like the Battlestar Galactica game (just as an example) has a quick reference guide as its last page here (page 32 on the pdf file). Just something that can be quickly glanced at during game play that goes over the very basics.
Other than those things I thought it was fairly straight forward and clear! EDIT: This is all on version 1, which is the version I had these comments for. Hopefully some comments are still relevant!
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 21, 2015 11:52:31 GMT
Thanks for the feedback!
On the cards we only ever refer to 'Sovereigns'. Maybe using the word 'coins' in the rulebook is confusing. Or maybe using the term 'Sovereign' is confusing and we should just use the word 'coin' for all the money? I added more pictures in the new rulebook which hopefully makes it clearer.
The titles are a mess, I agree. I originally underlined the main titles, but due to some quirk in Photoshop (Which i'm using to make the PDF) if I underline text then in the PDF the text can't be selected, which is a no-no. I can do a dirty workaround where i physically draw a line under text to make it look underlined? It's something that needs fixing though.
I took the FAQ out of the new rulebook. I should probably add it back in, and if I do then it will have it's own page. It was a last minute thing that I just threw at the end of the Advanced Rules, which wasn't ideal.
I just added a quick play sheet type thing to the back of the rules! I realised that not having one was a bit of an oversight. It doesn't actually explain any of the rules, it just tells you the order of the turn and actions available.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 21, 2015 21:27:15 GMT
FAQ could also be written based on the questions someone without a solid knowledge about this genre of card game.
I fear I may be giving my girlfriend an annoying amount of extra work. "Keep track of any questions you have about how it is supposed to work."
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Oct 21, 2015 23:59:35 GMT
All feed back is super important! As you can see we are already making big changes, so anything people can contribute is worthwhile. We need as many people as possible to read it!
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 22, 2015 1:53:40 GMT
Oh, for the FAQ we definitely need:
"So... we can't attack with those already opposing or supporting a challenge?" "No. They do defend themselves when attacked though. Consider them focusing on their objective."
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Oct 22, 2015 2:30:15 GMT
If you think about it as attacking, supporting/opposing or exerting to be that characters "action" for the turn then I think its easier to get your head around it. Once it's used, that character can't normally do anything else till the turn is over. By doing any of those things, a character commits themselves to their chosen action for the turn.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 22, 2015 2:33:03 GMT
That makes sense.
Except for if, say, the event is itself an attack, or duel, you'd think that those fighting it would be fighting each other. So it could be somewhat non-intuitive. I suppose you could have an event where if losing, one of the supporting characters takes some damage. But that seems needlessly complex.
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 22, 2015 12:44:28 GMT
It sounds like we need to be clearer about the Actions then.
I can break the Actions into two sections: Some Actions are taken by Units (like Attacking) and others by the player (such as buying an Event or Passing). That should make it a little clearer.
Originally, Units Exerted (tapped) when supporting and Attacking, but because we physically move the Unit 'into' the Challenge we took the Exerting out because the unit was already used for the turn.
I can explain that a Unit may only be used once per turn - the reason I didn't is because there is an Event 'Not Yet Spent' that takes your Unit out of a Challenge so it can take another Action and people might think you cant tak another Action with it. But I can literally reference the card and explain that it allows you to take a second Action with a Unit.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 22, 2015 16:48:45 GMT
That would make sense.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 24, 2015 6:09:23 GMT
Going through the rulebook again:
Page 3 Paragraph 2, 2nd sentence. It includes two ideas, one of purchasing champions etc to aid in winning challenges, then skipping directly to the effect of winning challenges. I see the connection, but this also introduces the new concept of power to do so. It might be best to divide that up into another sentence.
Page 4 Nation, Reference, and Allegiance section The first paragraph should probably say what those “individual cards” for each nation are. Basically, say something like “There is an individual card for each nation in the game called the “reference card”” Or “Each nation has an individual “reference card” that...” ---See, after reading it again, I realize that the Nation Card is separate from the Reference Card. But I didn't when I read it. So this could definitely be clearer. “Each individual nation has a “Nation Card” that provides....” “There are also separate Reference Cards that...” “Finally, there are Allegience Cards...”
---Another thing is that the note on “Advanced Rules” comes after the first instance of Red Boxed text. Could be moved about. Or something.
Page 5
“Magical Elements” rather than just “Elements” beside the number referencing the magical element the card has. This is just clearer rather than leaving it to the text next to it to clarify.
Page 6 Experience Deck is referred to without red boxes.
Page 7 Elements. It could be simpler/clearer to constantly refer to these as Magical Elements.
Page 8 Ivos: the wall part... separates “the lands of the Ivos from the Junlocks.” rather than just “the lands of the Ivos from Junlocks.” Maybe? Cleaner that way. You could even say “from the lands of the Junlocks” I suppose.
Junlocks: “lose confederacy”? Junlocks do lose a lot, because they're disorganized savages, but I think you meant “loose confederacy”. Could maybe divide that sentence into two too.
Zadakine: In the “family and wealth are of the utmost importance to them” part... between the “them,” and “acquiring” words may be an extra space... and could do with a “so” or “therefore” or even a separate sentence as well.
Page 9: “Take your starting champion and place (it) in front of you”
More to come.... maybe.
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 24, 2015 12:51:10 GMT
Thanks for the feedback again Canuovea, you are a machine!
I separated the power explanation in the first paragraph:
"With each successful Challenge, players will gain Wealth and Power - the first player to achieve 10 Power will be victorious!"
I cleaned up the nation/reference/allegiance cards. The first draft of the rulebook just referred to all of these as 'reference cards' so I gave them each unique names. Hopefully when I put in the reference card picture it will be a little clearer? I fixed up the text though like you suggested.
I took out the first red 'advanced rules' box - it wasnt needed because it was telling you the game components, not explaining rules.
Good find on the 'Elements' thing. It's good to use the same game terms for everything, and a few slip through the cracks. I just went through the 500 or so cards and made sure everything used the same wording!
I took out the Experience deck as a draw deck line - it tells you at the bottom of the page in the red 'Advanced Rules' box.
Theres a finite space to describe the races unfortunately! How about "This wall seperates the lands of the Ivos from those of the Junlocks." and take away last line about them being enemies?
The space in the Zadakine explaination was to do with the paragraph formatting, but I added 'so' in there to make it flow better.
I changed the Actions to be bullet points rather than numbers, like el_merlot suggested. Theres a space at the end of page 19 - I could put in the explanation of Units only being able to take 1 Action in there? So it would be a clarification at the end of the Actions.
Other than in components, I tried to take all mention of 'coins' out of the rules (I think because they are plastic coins I need to call them that in the components bit)
I need to add the FAQ/Clarifications page back in I guess (though I feel we should be really clear in the section WITH the rule rather than fAQ it at the end).
Again thanks a lot guys, you are really helping with making the rulebook much better!
|
|
|
Post by StyxD on Oct 24, 2015 19:42:21 GMT
Okay, first batch of my remarks incoming. There will probably be further ones. First, let me say that your PDF is weird. It loads terribly slowly, sometimes chokes the whole system, and copying text from it is wonky, including complete inability to copy certain characters. So if there are any typos in the quotes, it's because of that. Also, English is not my first language, obviously, so I may be unknowingly transplanting some stylistic rules that are from my language. Take it all with a grain of salt. "and is" seems unnecessary to me, since the clauses joined by "and" don't really describe the same type of thing. It would sound better to me as "Harkovast: Clash of Nations is a card game for two or more players, set in the fantasy world of Harkovast". In the context of this sentence, "this goal" refers to supporting and opposing challenges. Is this correct? Because I though the goal is to get 10 Power. Speaking of Power... "Power" is kind of uncountable, so this sounds really weird to me. At the same time, I suppose it's supposed to be an abstract Power units, and "10 Power points" sounds kind of unwieldy (and may possibly get you sued by Microsoft). So I don't know if it should be changed or not. This probably should be changed to "should include". At least that's how manuals usually word it. This is not very clear, you have not yet described the rules for challenges failing or succeeding. I suppose you mean something like positive and negative points? In "Nation, Reference & Allegiance Cards", Reference card being a "reminder" is repeated twice, making for some ugly sentence structure. The two sentences be merged into one? You might want to change "will" to "may", to not be so forcing. I would break this into two sentences, since it sounds to me like "you will dictate your goals, but you pretty much have only one option". Is race referenced anywhere on those cards? Because races do not equal factions. In fact, Rin-Xien is with the Zadakine IIRC, but he's a full-blood Tsung-Dao otherwise. In "Game Setup", step 5. seems to be missing a verb. In Eslum It doesn't seem to make it clear that the age of enlightenment is an Eslum thing, not worldwide. In Ivos, "Militaristic" is randomly capitalized. Shouldn't this be perfect tense? Also, I'm not sure if a still-used wall can be called a monument, but maybe it can in English. I'm pretty sure Vellastrom was never mentioned before this point (unfortunately, it's impossible to do a text search in this PDF). It would probably be simpler to write "in their continent". 1) Should be "players", 2) "choose" doesn't seem, in this sentence (to me), to refer to anything in particular, probably "choose one" would be better, or "choose the one you want" for maximum clarity.
|
|
|
Post by RED_NED on Oct 24, 2015 20:55:25 GMT
Again, you guys are knocking it out of the park with the feedback! Thanks, it's all great stuff. I'm making the pdf in Photoshop - something I thought would be good, but it turns out is pretty crappy actually. Once we get the PDF finished, I'll have to remake it in a proper PDF making program. It's unfortunate, but something we can do later. I fixed a lot of the wording you suggested. The Nymus consider themselves the most civilized in all of Harkovast now, the arrogant beaks! I think that the explanation of 10 Power, and the succeeding/failing Challenge dice is okay - we have to mention game terms somewhere. I've seen other games explain it this way, I can see your issues though. Galmonian's wall can be considered a monument. English is such a messy language that a lot of words can mean a hundred different things. I changed the wording on choosing Nation/Starting Champion and just put at the end in brackets that we think its better to choose at random. That was really useful stuff though - especially the Vellastrom mention! I've made tons of little changes (spelling mistakes, random capital letters and page numbers being wrong) so I've updated the links to the Rulebook in the first post and this one: Current Rulebook **EDIT** Rulebook Version 4
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Oct 24, 2015 21:24:56 GMT
Okay, before I continue with my checking up on things...
Getting rid of the sentence about Junlocks being their enemies is fine, makes sense to me. After all, technically so are the Ano-Chee and Onrapa...
|
|