"Do you like your rules friendly?" Topic

Guys quick question and this is strickly a preference one. When reading a rule set do you like the designer to include "personality" a few comments here and there "Side X wins the fight, obviously they got lucky this time". OR do you prefer your rules cut and dry, straight forward, save any comments for the designer notes?? I have seen them both ways and was just curious if one style seemed to be preferred over the other?? Thanks, happy gaming!!

Easy Reading

With commentary saved for designer notes
Examples could be given there to help player with period tactics or how the rules work to your best advantage

I think you can hold the comments for the end. I also would not want a lucky shot or die roll to be my only example of something.

A little personality helps keep my attention but too much (looking at you 40k/Flames of War 3rd) gets in the way.

I prefer designer's notes in the appropriate chapter but in a text box or separate section. I find they can help me parse rules questions if I have some clue to intent or design philosophy.

If your rules are part of a book, the Peter Grant style is admirable. But there really isn't room for that sort of thing in my preferred 2-4 pages, and even at the 24-32 page level, it still belongs under "Designer Notes" and not cluttering up the main body while I search for how to form square.

Don't care for the personality. Just the rules please.

Thanks for the input, sounds like designer notes at the end is the way to go!! Is it Sgt Friday that would say "just the facts mam"? BTW My goal is for the rule book to be around what you would expect for a game of its size and detail 36 pages give or take a few, depending on example illustrations, etc.

In my rules I am finally putting to words, I will have a separate section of numbered designer's notes with an annotation in the rules that corresponds to the designer notes section that explains the whys in detail. The introduction will explain the goals and how by value sets exist, how to use them for the game as they put real life factors into the game (more of a simulation) but how the mechanics make it a fast moving game and will be offered an example of how a simulation can also be a fun game that challenges the players to deal with challenges and decision making their real life counterparts had to deal with. In playtests (using ACW as the period), with one corps per side, a typical games have taken 10 turns and a definite conclusion arrived at about three and a half hours of real time. Less time to play a game? Simply use fewer units. (Like most games.) When I started out, I had more designer notes than rules! While I perceived a need to explain those real life factors and how they can be integrated into the rules, I felt breaking them up and injecting them where appropriate was a better approach. Since concept may need insight as to why the mechanics are the way they are additional insight may need further explanation, best to deal with the particulars when encountered rather than shotgun them in the beginning. Let's get to the pushing of lead quickly! By the way, NO CHARTS ARE NEEDED TO PLAY THE GAME ONCE TROOPS ARE PLACED ON THE TABLE! (EXCEPT for a business sized card showing weapons ranges.) Miniature units are all the same size with variations taken into effect in their ratings in pre-game prep. Unit are placed on the table as a unit and are removed as a unit! NO book keeping is involved in playing the game. "Cohesion: It's the Name of the Game" is the working title. Since the basic rules work for all periods (up to WWI so far), only those factors that that would be period specific need to change. Nice reading what people look for in how how rules are presented, here. Thanks for your comments.

Thanks for the info, all is very helpful. Yes I have way more designer notes then I think I will end up using and folks would want to read. After the feed back I plan to have them at the end and probably have the number section they refer to. Happy gaming everyone!!!!

I think one reason designer notes evolved is because designers were sensitive to criticisms and began to anticipate it. So they began explaining why they did certain things.

The guy who has done this the best, IMO, is Neil Thomas. He is a good clear writer, to the point, his rules are simple but very adaptable.