Skip to Content
 

What makes a good rulebook?

21 replies [Last post]
Nestalawe
Nestalawe's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/07/2008

Hey ya'll!

Ok, I am just putting together the rulebook for the main game I am working on. Its a bit of a monster (40 pages...) but I have yet to go through and edit it, as I have written everything in a very clear, repetitive manner mainly so that I, in designing each aspect of the game, wouldn't forget why I chose to do things as I did...

Anyway, so I am in the rulebook editing phase, before which I will pass it along to a few compatriots to help with editing and redefining, before mocking up a game to run a few playtests before ripping it all apart again :wink:

What I would like to explore, and what I am sure would be of good use to other designers, is what makes a good rulebook. What makes things clear and easy to reference, and allows players to play the game right out of the box, without being daunted by the rules. I know my rulebook will be fairly chunky (though I reckon I can get it down to 15 pages or so...) but I would like to have it so that a new group can get stuck in straight away.

Anyway, have been reading a few rulebooks online, in particular for various Fantasy Flight games - WOTR, Arkham Horror, Runebound, Doom and A Game Of Thrones. Each of these have a similar structure -

- Welcome / Background
- Introduction / Object of the Game
- Components Listing
- Components Description
- Game Setup
- Turn Structure
- Any other important info
- Winning Conditions

Sometimes the order is a little different, but thats basically it. The guts of the info is in the Turn Structure section.

Apart from looking great artistically, the Fantasy Flight game rules also provide good examples and to me are always pretty clear.

I have slogged through a lot of 'old style' rules, including such classics as those from Magic Realm and Freedom In The Galaxy. But while I am 'kinda' willing to slog through the rules if I 'know' the game is good, it is not something I wish my players to have to do. Also, I have read a LOT of rules for games that are 'broken' and have had numerous re-writes, addendum and revisions (see MR and FITG above...)

So, what are some other rules people have used that they have found to be good, easy to understand etc etc. The game I am working on is fairly detailed, but I am hoping the core mechanics should be fairly easy to remember after a single turn of play.

Another set of rules I admire are those for Mare Nostrum, which fit into four A4 pages, though I must admit there has been a lot of FAQ for the game. But I know my rules will be 15+ pages, so what else is out there that work really well?

seo
seo's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

If the game rules are very detailed (because the game needs them that way), I would suggest to splite them somehow into a Game Overview or Basic rules or Basic Gameplay section right after the Setu-up section (or even before it, including a basic setup info if the complete setup is very complex), so new players can get a general idea of the game as a whole before they begin studying the details of turn structure, movement, fighting, scoring etc.

I have little experience with rulebooks (I've just begun designing games a few months ago), but I used to write computing books. In spanish, don't worry. ;-)
One of the things I was always careful about was tying to avoid, as much as possible) sentences like "explained later" or "see below". You will need those from time to time, but the less you need to use them the easier to understand the instructions will be.
I'm not saying that you should not use these sentences but that you should try to avoid the NEED to use them. If you need X and Z to use A, try to explain X and Z before you explain the use of A.

I used to have a great refference for technical writing, with many clever tips like avoiding long sentences, use clear language, etc., all things that sound obvious once you know them, but are easy to forget when writing. I've been looking for it but I can't find it. I'll keep searching. If I found it I'll post the some tips you might find helpful.

Seo

zaiga
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: What makes a good rulebook?

Nestalawe wrote:
Anyway, have been reading a few rulebooks online, in particular for various Fantasy Flight games - WOTR, Arkham Horror, Runebound, Doom and A Game Of Thrones. Each of these have a similar structure -

- Welcome / Background
- Introduction / Object of the Game
- Components Listing
- Components Description
- Game Setup
- Turn Structure
- Any other important info
- Winning Conditions

Sometimes the order is a little different, but thats basically it. The guts of the info is in the Turn Structure section.

I agree that's how most rulebooks are organized these days. When I orally explain a game to people, I tend to explain the winning conditions before diving into the details of the turn structure, because that seems to make the most sense to people. They want to know what they should before knowing how they can do it. However, when writing down the rules, it seems to make more sense to explain the exact winning condition at the end.

Quote:
The game I am working on is fairly detailed, but I am hoping the core mechanics should be fairly easy to remember after a single turn of play.

I think it's wise to explain exceptions to the core rules, and specific interactions of special abilities of cards or other things, at the end. Don't mix them with the explanation of the rules. For example, if players may do two actions per turn, don't yet say that the playing of the card "Magic Potion Of Potence" in combination with your pawn being on the special square "The Village Of Ham" allows you to do three actions per turn. Save things like this for a separate section at the end, where you explain all of these specific kind of interactions.

Quote:
Another set of rules I admire are those for Mare Nostrum, which fit into four A4 pages, though I must admit there has been a lot of FAQ for the game. But I know my rules will be 15+ pages, so what else is out there that work really well?

When you design a game it's wise to try to make the ruleset as tight as possible. However, when actually writing down the rules use as many pages and examples as you need to completely and clearly explain the rules. Don't cut corners just because you want the ruleset to fit in four pages. In fact Mare Nostrum may be a good example of how not to do it. Having a four page rule book is a nice selling point, but not if the other half of the rule book has to be found on the internet in a FAQ.

When I write rules and I notice something is particularly tricky to explain, I sometimes change the rule slightly, just to make it more understandable and easier to explain. Often, a convoluted rule hints at a deeper problem, and you need to clean something up in the core of the game system, which in turn may simplify the explanation of other rules. This is why it may be a good idea to write the rule book not at the end of the design stage, but somewhere closer to the beginning of the design stage.

seo
seo's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

zaiga wrote:
When I orally explain a game to people, I tend to explain the winning conditions before diving into the details of the turn structure, because that seems to make the most sense to people. They want to know what they should before knowing how they can do it. However, when writing down the rules, it seems to make more sense to explain the exact winning condition at the end.
I agree. It's important for people facing the game fo the first time to know what it is about. I think the "Introduction / Object" section should give the basic information (like "control X territories" or better yet something more general, like "control enogh territories" or "be the first to reach the treasure island"), and then in the Winning conditions at the end you give a detailed explanation.

A structured writing will help. Try to divide the rules into independent blocks explaining each element of the game. Thus you'l be able to move one block up or down as you found that "to learn this you should know that before".

Seo

Nestalawe
Nestalawe's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/07/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

Quote:
One of the things I was always careful about was tying to avoid, as much as possible) sentences like "explained later" or "see below". You will need those from time to time, but the less you need to use them the easier to understand the instructions will be.

I agree. The way I have approached designing the game was after writing down a lotta notes (and having an idea for this game for the last six years or so...) was to break the game into sections (as if I was writing the rulebook) and then write up each section, developing the rules system and mechanics as I went along, making change to things I had previously written as they came up. Now it is a a matter of putting each of these sections in order, and then trimming them all down to that they make sense. A part of this is getting away from having to have the same (or simliar) information in more than one place, but at the same time having it in a logical place so that I don't have to write 'see below' etc...

Quote:
When I orally explain a game to people, I tend to explain the winning conditions before diving into the details of the turn structure, because that seems to make the most sense to people.

Rulebooks tend to either have the winning conditions right atthe start, or right at the end. Thinking about it more, it does kinda make sense to have them atthe start, so that when going through the rules, players have a good sense of what they are trying to achieve. But I do think it depends on the type of game.

Interesting bringing up the point about explaining games to people orally as well, as I usually find most games are taught by one person reading up on the rules and then explaining them to the group. I think that if the rules are written well, and within a clear logical structure, then it makes it a lot easier to teach people the guts of the game swiftly and in the right way, i.e. A then B then C etc.

Quote:
I think it's wise to explain exceptions to the core rules, and specific interactions of special abilities of cards or other things, at the end.

Yep, I agree. I also think it helps if the designer 'knows' their game well, in that they know the core aspects of the game that players really need to grasp to play correctly so that they may then focus on the 'special fluff' later. Thus if they understand the core mechanics well, then they can better understand how to utilise the special fluff as effective strategies. For example in the game I am working on there are a lot of special Abilities that players will be able to build up, gather and use. The core mechanics of the game should work without them, but by using these well, I want my players to be able to immerse themselves in the game, get a real feel for the theme and an attachment to their position - each player having a different role, strengths and weaknesses and playing style. But only by understanding how the game essentially flows (gaining/spending resources, where and when they can do certain things during the turn) will player be able to really utilise their special abilities well.

Quote:
When you design a game it's wise to try to make the ruleset as tight as possible. However, when actually writing down the rules use as many pages and examples as you need to completely and clearly explain the rules. Don't cut corners just because you want the ruleset to fit in four pages. In fact Mare Nostrum may be a good example of how not to do it. Having a four page rule book is a nice selling point, but not if the other half of the rule book has to be found on the internet in a FAQ.

Heh heh, maybe Mare Nostrum wasn't the best example for me :wink: but yes, I totally agree. I think it will be a tricky balance making sure everything that needs to get explained is covered, but in a clear and concise manner that won't cause confusion. I'm kinda looking forward to being able to edit and cut my ruleset down, which is a good sign I reckon :wink: partly because, as you say, if a rule is difficult to explain, then there may be a deeper underlying problem that must first be addressed.

And yeah, for me anyway, writing the rulebook throughout the design process is very important. I see any game I design as being very strong thematic-wise, so the theme should show in every aspect of the design process. I always think back to the 'game-world' I am creating and asking myself how things should happen in that world, thinking how I want the players to 'feel' when playing the game...

Nestalawe
Nestalawe's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/07/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

Quote:
A structured writing will help. Try to divide the rules into independent blocks explaining each element of the game. Thus you'l be able to move one block up or down as you found that "to learn this you should know that before".

Yeah that is exactly what I have done. Now I am chopping the blocks into bits and fitting them into the puzzle of my rulebook :wink:

One tricky thing I have found is where to put the explanations of 'things'. i.e. where to outline what a 'Creature Hive' is, or to explain why 'Vampire Hunters' exist, etc.

Though, thats what these forums are for eh wot! And even in writing this it all starts to become so much clearer...

dete
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: What makes a good rulebook?

Nestalawe wrote:

- Welcome / Background
- Introduction / Object of the Game
- Components Listing
- Components Description
- Game Setup
- Turn Structure
- Any other important info
- Winning Conditions

I think this is better:
-Intro (it is a welcome)
-Game set up (components are covered)
-Turn (the most boring part)
-how to win (everything important is here or already mentioned)

too many chapters is discouraging,
small chapters with sub divisions is better no?

a decent rule book provides all the necessary info to play
in a coherent manner.

A GOOD rule book does this and is entertaining at the same time.

An excellent rule book makes you want to re-read it
over and over just for entertainment!

To do this, I try to mix in the story with the rules instead of
making them separate.

zaiga
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: What makes a good rulebook?

dete wrote:
To do this, I try to mix in the story with the rules instead of
making them separate.

Oh no! The horror, the horror! ;)

Personally, I find most attempts at inducing some humor, theme and story into the rules to be very annoying and distracting. I don't expect reading rules to be fun. It's just something I have to do in order to be able to play a game. Playing the game should be the fun part! Just keep the rules clean and to the point so that I can quickly play the game.

I do think the overall tone of the rules should be light. It shouldn't read like a dusty, old lawbook. You can add a little joke here or there, to lighten up the overall tone of the rulebook - examples of play are a good place to do this so you don't have to mess up the actual rules - but please don't turn the rulebook into a novel.

Just my 2 eurocents.

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Re: What makes a good rulebook?

dete wrote:
To do this, I try to mix in the story with the rules instead of
making them separate.

I'm with René here - the horror, the horror!

dete wrote:
An excellent rule book makes you want to re-read it
over and over just for entertainment!

No. An excellent rulebook is one you only need to read once ;-))

Verseboy
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: What makes a good rulebook?

Nestalawe wrote:
Ok, I am just putting together the rulebook for the main game I am working on. Its a bit of a monster (40 pages...)

- Welcome / Background
- Introduction / Object of the Game
- Components Listing
- Components Description
- Game Setup
- Turn Structure
- Any other important info
- Winning Conditions

Lordy, Gordy! I don't think I've ever read a 40-page rulebook before. I'm not sure that I could.

The games I have taken far enough to write explicit rules for are all party/creative games, so there aren't as many details to explain. The format I've used, though, mirrors what you've stated above.

I try to write rules in a conversational tone, but I try to make sure I've covered every exact detail so nothing can be misconstrued. (Only playtesting can verify that, though.) Graphically, I break things down into bold subheads, so it's easy to find the section you need to refer to. I try to number the steps, rather than running them together in paragraph form. Photos or illustrations in the body or in a sidebar can be helpful. Specific examples off to the side can really clear things up for readers, too.

I think specific winning conditions should be at the end, but a general idea of what one is trying to accomplish in order to win should be in the overview or intro. Deciphering the rules without understanding what you need to accomplish (in general terms) is hard. You have to be able to relate the rules to their purpose as you're first ingesting them.

Or so I think.

Good luck in editing everything down.

Steve

Nestalawe
Nestalawe's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/07/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

Quote:

Quote:
dete wrote:
An excellent rule book makes you want to re-read it
over and over just for entertainment!

No. An excellent rulebook is one you only need to read once ;-))

I agree. It is fine to read a RPG rulebook over and over, as they usually have (well, need to really...) lots of background and useful material. And you can do this in your spare time. But a Boardgame rulebook should ideally be readable once, with anything you need to refer to during the game on player handouts or a reference sheet.

A rulebook that contains brief examples of play that you can read in one sitting and then get stuck into the game without having to refer to it again would be perfect :wink:

Plus, ideally, the game itself should be able to 'teach' you how to play it. i.e. after reading the rules and playing out one turn, that first turn should make a helluva lotta sense and the next turn should feel as if it was a natural progression from the first...

Ah for the day when we can just plug a chip into the back of our necks and download the rules directly to our brain and begin playing... But by then Boardgames (as we know them...) will well be a novelty of the past :wink:

Nestalawe
Nestalawe's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/07/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

Quote:
Lordy, Gordy! I don't think I've ever read a 40-page rulebook before. I'm not sure that I could.

He heh, I take it you are not a wargamer? :wink:

It does depend on the type of game - sure a party game should be fairly short, as people just wanna jump straight in.

Hmm, 40 pages does sound long, I assure you it is not that hard reading though, and the text was rather large...

Anyways, anyone who has played any ol' hex and counter Avalon Hill game from the 70's would be used to big bad rulebooks - so I know what a monster rulebook is, and will be staying well clear of it.

Look into my eyes... 8O You Will Love Reading My Rulebook. It shall be a pleasure, a pure joy. You will reach the end and start playing straight away without even realising you have even read the rules, the gameplay will all just come so naturally... :wink:

Anonymous
What makes a good rulebook?

sometimes it helps when you give them a booklet with a sample play game with the decks set up and a book teaching them how to play as they go through the battle so that they can understand how the rules work in play.

Verseboy
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
What makes a good rulebook?

Nestalawe wrote:
He heh, I take it you are not a wargamer? :wink:

I confess.

Still, the rules of good rules apply to wargames and party games alike. The suggestion JLondon makes about a sample play game is a good one, if possible. Meuterer does this. I found it helped a lot to actually walk through a simulated turn. They have the rules on the left and the sample play as it follows those rules opposite on the right-hand side.

Steve

dete
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
What makes a good rulebook?

I got slammed :( (tears......)

JackDarwid
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
What makes a good rulebook?

I remember when I tried to read a 3rd edition rule book of Magic Realm.
As soon as I know the thickness (and the long diagrams for battle), I gave up.
I think more than 10 pages (A4) is hard to read, discouraging (plus, I have to remember THAT much when playing the game? oh no! :)

It is annoying (to me) to keep looking in the rule book while playing (once or twice is OK, but after a couple of play and still looking everything in the rulebook is , well, not good)

So, when I designed a game, other that making the rulebook as simple as possible, I always put a 'remainder' (in a 'Rule Summary' card if it is a card game, or in the board if it's a board game), so if I haven't playing the game for a long time, and I want to play it now, I only have to look at the remainder to refesh my memories (yes, looking the rulebook a little is OK).

Unless, maybe if I really really like the theme anda everyone tell that this game is a masterpiece, (then) maybe I'll try the best to read (and understand) the rulebook (but, sniff, I still fail Magic Realm)

That's what I thought.

Nestalawe
Nestalawe's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/07/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

Quote:
I found it helped a lot to actually walk through a simulated turn.

I agree that examples of play help extremely. If each turn is fairly short, then a simulated turn is the most effective way of explaining how it all works.

Different types of games, of different lengths/complexity benefit from different types of rulebooks and styles of explanation methinks.

Quote:
I remember when I tried to read a 3rd edition rule book of Magic Realm...

He heh... The network/internet was down at work this morning, so looking for something to read to pass the time I cam across the MRIPE (Magic Realm In Plan English) rules I had saved a while ago. I have now waded my way through three sets of rules for the game - the Original, the 3rd Edition, and the MRIPE edition. It is amazing how different they are in reading. The Original rules are a nightmare, The 3rd Edition are better, but still maddening if you are a newbie. But the MRIPE rules, man, everything starts to click into place! The actual rules are not different from the 3rd Edition (which Are different/updated from the Original rules) but they are explained and outlined So much clearer. Though I have yet to play a game, with the new rules at my side I am sure it should make a lot of sense ;)

But, the MRIPE rules ARE still 116 pages long... (includes all description lists etc...)

But yeah, different games need different rules ;)

Quote:
I think more than 10 pages (A4) is hard to read, discouraging (plus, I have to remember THAT much when playing the game? oh no! :)

What kind of games do you play? Some games just plainly Need to have rules long enough to go over everything. I was also going through the Arkham Horror rules this morning - Arkham Horror Rules - I am Really looking forward to this game, and though the rules are 24 pages, they look to be very clear and I am not daunted by them. Though this is partly because they are visually great to look at, lots of images etc. But there are loads of examples and detailed outlines of play.

I must say that I am a big 'Theme' gamer, in that one of the main reasons I will play a game is because I am into the theme. I am into Sci-fi/Space/Fantasy/Horror type strategic games and so any game of this type will attract me over an abstract game (thus I am not a big euro-gamer). Then will come the mechanics and how the game actually plays. I have bought a heap of old games of Ebay that I knew were 'broken' or not very good, but I am into the themes they portray and interested in how the designers attempted to make them playable (a couple of examples - Elric, Beastlord, Valley of Four Winds - look em up on BGG...).

So, in saying that, I am looking for games that have a deep theme and have playability that reflects that. For me, I don't mind a long rulebook if the game Needs/Justifies it i.e. Arkham Horror of Twilight Imperium 3.

But yeah, I like to be immersed in a game, and don't mind playing a good game for as long as it needs to be played - 4-6+ hours is cool with me if the game deserves it and holds all the players. The longer the better IF the game is worth it.

Do most gamers prefer shorter games nowadays? - not considering time restrictions. I mean if you had a whole weekend to play games, nothing else, would you rather play a lot of short games, or a few longer games? I know people always talk about never having time these days, or needing games that can be played in a 1-2 hour evening sitting, but really, given a choice, would people rather play long or short games?

Sorry, starting to rant ;)

phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
What makes a good rulebook?

Hmmmm. I seem to recall we used to have a document somewhere called how to write a good rulebook. It was short but a very good primer on the subject. I'll dig it up tonight and post it.

-Darke

Nestalawe
Nestalawe's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/07/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

Hey Darkehorse!

Cheers, that would be useful... I am coming to the conclusion that to help define a 'good rulebook' also depends on knowing what type of game it is for as well - a good rulebook for a Party Game would not work for a more detailed wargame.

Apart from the FF examples I started with, does anyone know of any particularly brilliant rulebooks out there? For different types of games? What are some examples of really nasty beasts, and some beautiful examples? Often a nasty rulebook can turn players away from an otherwise great game...

phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
Ahh
Verseboy
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
What makes a good rulebook?

Nestalawe wrote:
I am coming to the conclusion that to help define a 'good rulebook' also depends on knowing what type of game it is for as well - a good rulebook for a Party Game would not work for a more detailed wargame.

While there would be differences of degree, I tend to think the format for a rulebook for virtually any game would be the same. A strategy game or a war game would simply need more details. In all cases, though, you still need to give an overview, state who it's for, how long it should take, list the contents, define terms, explain the turns and rounds, and detail how the game ends and what it takes to win.

Now, do you imbue the rules with "flavor" and theme and run the risk of obscuring some of the details? That would be a case by case kind of thing. It might well be a matter of personal preference. The basic requirements shouldn't change.

Steve

Hedge-o-Matic
Hedge-o-Matic's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2008
What makes a good rulebook?

Page count for rule books is deceiving. With diagrams and figures, rule sets can bloat to apparently large sizes, and still be short reading. Go for a moderate page count on rules, such as four pages.

After the four pages of rules are completed, them you can add chrome, such as background. but I'd suggest getting a gamer friend to read your rules set and then have them explain the game to you, or to a third person. that's the true test of whether the rules work or not.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut