"Wargame Rules." Topic

As a collector and connoisseur of fine wargame rules (recent purchases include "Over the Hills" and "Snappy Nappy"- and I don't play Napoleonics …yet) I note some of my other recent PDF purchases were 146 pages long and 184 pages respectively.
As a teenager, I would have edited out such tomes, I had a strict 1/2" limit, a good writer would tell a good story, with enduring characters in about 100 pages. I broke this rule to read "The Godfather" by Mario Puzo, and learnt that movies were a better option.
This meant my reading was limited to short stories like "The Old Man and The Sea" by Hemingway and the collected works of the Brothers Grimm. I digress.
Some rule sets seems are inordinately long and need some different thought and layout conventions.
Taking "Fist Full of Tows 3" as a good example. It seems like a tome, but I printed it out in sections, core rules, scenarios, data and organisation (only the armies I used.
Wargame rules may need to be laid out backwards. Introduction at the back, as once you are using the rules, you seldom need to reference that information, maybe just a short 1 page "hello" at the front.
Pretty pictures, while draw you into a period and make good painting reference, get in the way of your search for flank charges and the particular definitions and consequences of said event.
Some rule writers and convention make sense, but I think for most writers of wargame rules writing is not their primary occupation and could use some advice from us- so what would your constructive advice or suggestion be?

All good points ,I do like Index at front though.Also quik play chart should be included.

1. Try for 2-4 pages. At most, write an Osprey. Anything longer is seldom adequately play-tested.
2. Always begin with sequence of operations.
3. Mark different sections with different fonts or typefaces.
4. If you use illustrations, make them illustrate points in the rules and not just serve as eye candy.
5. Put basing and scale where they can be read without breaking the shrink wrap.

I agree often rules writers forget once you have read the rules for the first time subsequent usage is as a manual. It should be written in a manner that makes it easy to find the important things in the rules, combat, movement etc. Lots of example of play is also something that is often forgotten by the rules writer, who knows the mechanics intimately but forgets that other do not. I have often had rules where you had to really look to figure out simple things like how does fire work, do you use one or two dice, do the modifiers affect the dice or the modifiers, simple things like that should not be hard to find.

Many times you get lost in the fluff. For example I picked up my copy of Tomorrows War published by Osprey. I remembered why it ended up in the shelf un-used. The fluff is all over the place and printing on a dark background makes it unbearable to read.

There are lots of example of great layout and the order things are but too often this is completely overlooked, sometimes for things as useless as eye candy or background fluff.

Mark different sections with different fonts or typefaces.

Arrrgh !!! No, that would look horrible!!!

Unless you mean have the section headings in a different typeface (or bold or underline)?

Major B +1. Pesonaly I detest rules that don't look like manuals. Such ruels are for folk to read and not play. Eye candy should be banned, its not in car repair manuals so why should it be in wargame rules. How to paint should not be in wargame rules.

There is no excuse for not having a good index Word does it automaticaly and updates as it changes.

Quite right, MajorB. Headings is what I meant.

I have had many sets of rules. I have found that I end up changing some part of most of them either because I did not understand what the writer was saying or I did not like some section. I do not need filler photos of miniatures, just give me a smaller book. But I do need diagrams. It is also a big help to have the Turn Sequence in order from beginning to end. And…it is really useful if the binding is such that the book lays flat – like a manual per UshCha. I have come to dread the index – it means there is too much going on in the rules for my aging brain to handle.

"Might of Arms" by Bob Bryant is a good example of a well written set of rules. What I like about it:
1). Economy of language. Not too little and not too much, just the right amount of words to explain something. 2). Information is well organized 3j No eye candy, no extra fluff. 4) Useful diagrams and charts 3) quick reference card of compacted info on front and back.

Find a set of rules you like and try to emulate the style. Get the content right first, then work on style of presentation.