Editor in Chief Bill | 19 Jul 2018 4:16 a.m. PST |
|
Cacique Caribe | 19 Jul 2018 5:49 a.m. PST |
Are these the same people who haven't bought a ruleset in a decade or even longer? :) Dan |
peterx | 19 Jul 2018 5:53 a.m. PST |
If it was a good, simple, clearly written set of rules, I would buy it even if it had no illustrations. |
Joes Shop | 19 Jul 2018 6:27 a.m. PST |
|
GildasFacit | 19 Jul 2018 6:34 a.m. PST |
Dan – no they are the people who want well written, clear text and useful diagrams instead of pointless pictures. Surprising though you may think that is, there are many rules published recently that fit that description. |
Texas Jack | 19 Jul 2018 6:51 a.m. PST |
I think the key part of the poll question is that no art doesnīt mean no charts and examples. So yeah, I would, and do, buy those. |
miniMo | 19 Jul 2018 7:28 a.m. PST |
I would and I have, but that doesn't mean I think it's a good idea for rules layout! |
robert piepenbrink | 19 Jul 2018 8:05 a.m. PST |
Be charitable Dan. I bought a copy of Rogue Stars and I'm still traumatized. It was Osprey's answer to the infomercial, and I really hope the figure manufacturer paid dearly for the "product placement." I buy a new set of rules about once a year, but far too many are winding up on my flea market table the next year. If you buy and paint an army and decide it's surplus to requirements, well, you've had the fun of painting it, and you can about get your money back. Buy and read a rule book, and decide it's no use, and it's hardly worth hauling to Lancaster--and that's without Edition 2.1 being released in the interval. |
Aethelflaeda was framed | 19 Jul 2018 8:06 a.m. PST |
I usuallytry to buy the pdf and if there is a version that can be printed without the flufff pictures, that is the one I print. |
Buck215 | 19 Jul 2018 12:55 p.m. PST |
Yes, I would, PROVIDED there were at least basic illustrations explaining play, terminology, etc. As an example, when I was in 8th grade my first rule book was WRG's Armour and Infantry rules 1925-50 (still have it to this day) and aside from the eventually understood British terminology (lorry, section, etc.) there was never an explanation or illustration as to troop basing. The rules only said a "group of figures mounted on a base". How many figures? What is this "base" made of? How are the figures "mounted" on this "base"? What color is this "base"? How heavy is this "base"? What is the dimension of this "base"? Most importantly, what the hell does a "base" look like with troops "mounted" on it? Those rules never had an explanation or illustration to explain to a 12-year old American boy what was being referenced, as if the rules and references were an inside secret that was not to be shared outside the secret circle only a select few knew about (i.e., middle-aged British men who used wargaming code only they knew) and not willing to share with the rest of the world or young people. Today, thanks to subsequent rules I have purchased, I know what a base is, how to make the sizes, number of troops/vehicles mounted, etc., and how to decorate it to complement the figure(s), and I do a really good job of it. WRG was my first rulebook, and it would have gone a long way if the authors would have had some illustrations and explanations of what they were trying to get across rather than assuming new people knew what they were talking about. Illustrations, explanations and playing examples in rules? YES, OF COURSE! Eye candy? Nice, but not necessary… |
Northern Monkey | 19 Jul 2018 1:25 p.m. PST |
Can anyone name me a successful set of rules published in black and white recently? I could name you two dozen in full colour. Of course, in theory, we'd ALL buy a set of rules in black and white (and I said as much in the thread which inspired this poll), but the fact is that successful rules that sell in volume are in colour. |
Texas Jack | 19 Jul 2018 2:50 p.m. PST |
Well I just had a lovely game of Bag the Hun, and the illustrations are black and white drawings that really lend a nice flavor. But they were published in 2010, so donīt know if that counts as recent. |
GildasFacit | 20 Jul 2018 1:51 a.m. PST |
Buck – is that possibly because none of the above were critical or affected the way the rules worked ? While I can understand why a 12 year old might find them incomplete, they were not written for that audience. They were wargaming rules, not a modelling guide. NM – this discussion isn't about the lack of colour but about the inclusion of pictures merely for illustration and not directly connected to the rules. Bloody Big Battles is one recently published set that does without photos and has been very well received. There are many others like them published since it became cheaper to print in full colour around the turn of the century but that didn't feel the need to use photos. Personally I have been put off trying many of the 'illustrated' rules because I'm not prepared to shell out that amount of cash just to try something. Even worse are those sets that give me all the 'history', modelling tips, uniform guides and force organisations for a high price. I already have all that, all I want are the rules. Give me them separate or I'll likely pass them by. |
War Artisan | 20 Jul 2018 3:08 a.m. PST |
the fact is that successful rules that sell in volume are in colour. If true (and I'm extremely reticent to jump to any conclusions on the basis of anecdotal evidence) then it only indicates a statistical correlation and not a causal relationship. It is just as likely that big color glossy rulebooks sell well because the publishers that can afford to print them can also afford more advertising and promotional activities. |
Whirlwind | 20 Jul 2018 5:43 a.m. PST |
DBA 3.0 seemed reasonably successful. |
Warlord | 20 Jul 2018 6:25 a.m. PST |
That is the way they use to come back in the day, bought many of them. People are use to eye-candy these days… |
UshCha | 20 Jul 2018 8:40 a.m. PST |
Personalty why would I pay for photos of model porn in a rule book, its just an excuse to put the price up. The successful War games research group did eminently well in black and white white. No pointless photographs and a sensible price. There are no stupid pointless photographs in user manuals or car manuals so why o why are the punters consider so puerile that they wont buy rules without pointless photographs (you can tell I have a thisng about thais can't you) ;-). |
Yellow Admiral | 20 Jul 2018 10:06 a.m. PST |
+1 Aethelflaeda was framed: I usually try to buy the pdf and if there is a version that can be printed without the flufff pictures, that is the one I print. I buy new rules all the time, in PDF. I own every David Manley publication I can get my hands on, some in multiple versions. Most of the color art is limited to the covers, which is downright polite (saves me ink costs when printing). In the last decade I have very rarely bought print-only rules, and only when I'm pretty sure I'm going to play them or use them as references (e.g., I collected all of Bruce Weigle's 19th C. rules, despite the fact that I'll probably never play them). The cost of printed rulebooks has risen high enough that I can only justify a few a year, and the "nice" things the publishers do these days to increase appeal just get in the way of using them anyway perfect binding, decorative-only color art (as opposed to color diagrams and charts), unreadable fancy fonts, etc. I sold off my original perfect-bound copy of Lasalle and kept the PDF and the coil-bound copy I printed for myself (with the charts on the back cover, where I can look at them without opening the book). - Ix |
Yellow Admiral | 20 Jul 2018 10:16 a.m. PST |
Can anyone name me a successful set of rules published in black and white recently? I could name you two dozen in full colour.Of course, in theory, we'd ALL buy a set of rules in black and white (and I said as much in the thread which inspired this poll), but the fact is that successful rules that sell in volume are in colour. And here we go again with the commercial-only definition of "success". This has already been refuted. The miniatures rules "industry" is no place to get rich, and most publications are essentially vanity press releases. I would bet money that more common definitions of "success" are along the lines of "broke even", "popular in niche", and "still being played years later". - Ix |
Pictors Studio | 20 Jul 2018 12:41 p.m. PST |
Even in theory I wouldn't buy a set of rules in black and white over one with nice pictures of miniatures dispersed throughout. |
Dynaman8789 | 20 Jul 2018 12:54 p.m. PST |
By my definition "Fireball Forward" and "Fistful of TOWs 3" where both successful and neither had pretty art. Fireball Forward has a little bit (a picture about the scenario in question) in the scenarios section and FFoT is all line drawings in the rules. |
GildasFacit | 20 Jul 2018 1:23 p.m. PST |
Go on Pictors – tell us WHY. So far nobody on that side of this discussion has attempted to explain what it is about photos in a set of instructions that make it so attractive that they MUST have them. I'm interested to hear that – genuinely so. I can't see any advantages myself so I would really like to see what others see that I don't. |
Pictors Studio | 20 Jul 2018 8:26 p.m. PST |
I can't stand reading rules. I'd rather read real books. If you are going to get me to read rules there had better be plenty of things for me to look at while I'm doing it. Also it at least makes me think that someone has some confidence in their work. If you are willing to put out a hard back rule book with lots of pretty pictures you're willing to invest some serious money in the product. If it is total crap, which it could still be, then you're out a lot of dosh. If you have a stapled together set of photocopied pages then you aren't out much. If the publisher is willing to invest the money in the rules then I'm willing to invest the time to read them. Otherwise it is too much of a gamble and my time is worth more than that. |
GildasFacit | 21 Jul 2018 1:46 a.m. PST |
Thanks Pictor, I can't agree, but at least it explains how you think of a set of rules. Strange that the one thing I see as a waste of money and a clear pointer to poor rules (the pictures and purely illustrative use of colour) you see as a sign of confidence and commitment. We can't all think the same I suppose. |
Aethelflaeda was framed | 21 Jul 2018 6:46 a.m. PST |
I have found that the more glossy pictures, that more often I disliked the actual game after playing. They might help people to read/buy the rules but it can still be lipstick on a pig. I think sometimes it's intentional, since the producers are really just putting out disposable adverts for this years fig offering and the game itself doesn't matter. It's just going to be changed again next year. They can be fun to look at but don't forget the real reason the pics are there…to hype a purchaser to buy. Ymmv. The same thing occurs in the adverts for a rule set or game on the website,lots of pretty pics and general descriptions for hype but low on actual descriptions on even basic things like scale, mechanics or complexity examples. |
ToysnSoldiers | 21 Jul 2018 7:43 a.m. PST |
I didn't vote. My answer is no, I wouldn't. Graphics are helpful to explain rules. I am not a nostalgic of the good old days. |
Winston Smith | 21 Jul 2018 8:39 a.m. PST |
I remember rules from the 80's with totally inaccurate illustrations. They were in the public domain and took up space. I remember when the first rules with color plates came out. They showed figures that were not based or organized per the written rules. |
Bob the Temple Builder | 22 Jul 2018 10:20 a.m. PST |
The wargame rules that I have written and published have black and white diagrams and photographs inside and a coloured cover. The illustrations are all intended to either explain how the rules work or to illustrate how they work in an exemplar battle report. I took a decision to price my books so that the paperback edition was about the same price as a wargame magazine, with the eBook edition being cheaper. I also publish hardback editions which are more expensive for wargamers who like to have a more robust book on their bookshelves. Are they 'successful'? Well sales are greater than I ever expected, with several hundreds of copies of the paperback and eBook editions being sold. |