Dear wargame companies, When a seasoned wargamer—who also happens to be a rulebook editor—cannot figure out the rules for your game because you write in ongoing comma-separated dependent clauses, you are making the game learning process significantly more difficult than needed.
-
Show this thread
-
Instead of saying something like, “First, in Phase II only, if desired, place...” SEPARATE the clauses. Why? Because after that ‘first’ comes a ‘second’. Based on the rules written, I can’t tell if the second only happens in Phase II as well, or if I ‘desire’ to do it.
2 replies 1 retweet 39 likesShow this thread -
Hire someone. It doesn’t have to be me. But hire someone. Not someone to proofread, but someone to edit. Set aside $$$ to do this. For a 30-page document, expect $500 or so. Adjust from there. 100+ rules questions in BGG forums is not worth it. Do people right.
1 reply 6 retweets 62 likesShow this thread -
I’d love to have the opportunity to holistically rewrite a wargame rulebook. There’s no need for it to be 50 pages. No need. I’ve read them, lots of them. We can cut down. You want more people playing wargames? Lower the barrier of entry.
3 replies 4 retweets 73 likesShow this thread -
Addendum: obviously this isn’t all wargame companies. All but one. Maybe two on a good day.
3 replies 0 retweets 42 likesShow this thread
As an outsider, it feels like wargames dodged the drive for accessibility in the hobby and now actively take pride at how hard their games are to learn. It could be the best game in the world but if I can't play it, I'll never know.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.