"Rules: Plain Language or Added Flavor?" Topic

Other: it depends … If the use of period terms is done well, then I am all in favour of it. Done badly and it can make the rules opaque and harder to learn, as well as being off-putting.

If you are going to use period terms in a foreign language, use the right ones, please. I hate it when rules use a term, and it is obvious from the usage that the author has just gone to a dictionary and grabbed the first word that seems appropriate without checking out how that word is actually used in that language. Also, please don't use singular terms when you really mean plural. Both of these destroy the period flavour for me. If in doubt, don't do it!

Where is the option to use plain language of the period for authenticity?

Rick

A mixture.

No problem with period flavour for descriptions and where appropriate.

So by the examples given:
1) psiloi instead of light infantry, fine with this, especially as "light infantry" brings a bunch of baggage from other periods
2) port and starboard for naval games, I would of thought this almost mandatory
3) Klingon words – not if its stuff I'm going to have to keep using, for unit titles (a la grenadiers or voltigeur), fair enough but not for core mechanics and rules, especially as I probably can't pronounce them!

Someone nerd enough to use Klingon terms in a rules set will probably think that you are not worthy of his genius if you don't like it.
Not that I'd game Star Trek anyway.

Other: – Use clear terminology and grammar. If period terms are the right terms to use for all the other reasons you pick one word or phrasing over another, then use them.

As Zippee says above, if there is a good reason to distinguish psiloi from the generic concepts of infantry, then it is the correct term to use.

port and starboard for naval games, I would of thought this almost mandatory

You would think it was mandatory for commercial aircraft crew as well since the safety regulations use those terms for parts of the aircraft. But apparently not.

Someone nerd enough to use Klingon terms in a rules set will probably think that you are not worthy

This is an example of why I can't game Star Trek except at home when I set it up. There is no "amateur" or "casual" level of commitment to this genre.

Sardinian Sheep War of 1534 – In Italian would be : La Guerra Sarda di Pecore nel 1534

I like a little bit of flavour text but preferably with a glossary included.

Okay, I'll bite. I have HUGE issue with writers putting 'gadzookery' into ECW rules. When you see things like 'Ye crophead shotte', or 'Stout Yeoman gentlemen of the pike'. Seventeenth century writers did play fast and loose with spellings, but there really is no need for us to do so in order to attempt to display period knowledge. There are perfectly acceptable military terms from the period which can be put to use in context very effectively. I'd much prefer a writer to be able to accurately define and represent firing by introduction and extradition rather than add them for flavour and get them entirely wrong which happens far more often than not.

Phew. I think I will go for a lie down in a darkened room…

The KISS rule should apply -- "Keep It Simple, Stupid." We need rules that are more precise and carefully constructed and edited, not flowery odes to amateurism.

This is one of issues I have with some of the rules written in the UK. Stick to the facts. I will add in my own historical flavor.

"Tastes Great!"

"Less Filling"

"Tastes Great!"

"Less Filling"

"Tastes Great!"

"Less Filling"

"Tastes Great!"

"Less Filling"
link

Rules up front.
Flavor in the back.