Skip to Content

Rules for Eminent Domain available for last minute comment!

7 replies [Last post]
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008

We're wrapping up the rulebook for Eminent Domain, and I would like to post it here for any last minute comments on the current draft! I have some notes already from personal emails and from the BGG thread, but I thought I'd post here as well. If you have any comments, please respond in this thread - pretty soon we'll be incorporating what we can and sending the game to the printer!

Thanks,
Seth

Yamahako
Offline
Joined: 12/01/2010
The text is very clear, and

The text is very clear, and understandable. Having played the game it was easy to follow - I can't comment on a blind read in this case - but I only played it twice and it was all still easy to recall where the rules fell into game play.

The only nit-picky things I would suggest - and only because these are my personal preferences:

1. I would move the Politics card description to right below the Colonize card description - it *looks* like there's enough room - though there might not be. In my mind it would help to separate the glossary and thanks from the major gameplay elements better.

2. I personally prefer all of the game action descriptions to come prior to learning how the game ends - but that's just a personal preference - I can also see the other side of it where you want to know how the winner is decided before you look at how to use the cards.

Those points being made - they are incredibly minor changes for one persons preference. The rule book looks gorgeous - and I hope we can get ours to look that nice!

le_renard
le_renard's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/08/2010
Nice looking and neat...

I never played the game or even read the rules before... this rulebook seems very clear, well documented and designed... Seeing this, I now want to try the game !

drktron
drktron's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/18/2010
First of all this is a

First of all this is a beautiful and well written rulebook. Congrats. Two minor issues I noticed in a quick read:
In the setup section it should say "Draw 5 cards...." and not "Draws 5 cards"
In the GAME END section I think grammatically the first sentence should be "game's end" instead of "game end". However I could be wrong :)

Also this was a clever way to make me want to buy your game ;)

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Thanks for the

Thanks for the comments!

drktron wrote:
Also this was a clever way to make me want to buy your game ;)

Heh, that was not my goal. Indeed, you ALREADY wanted to buy my game - by posting the rules I just made you aware of that fact ;)

rcjames14
rcjames14's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Fresh Look

I understood the rules... or at least the big concept. The graphic design is very good and supports the message, so I'm sure that even having not completed the rules, I think I could set up the game and start playing.

On a side note, I can't help but be reminded of two major games that hit the market in the past four years. I think you have blended the two in a novel way that looks pretty fun. And, I'm sure there are also a few roles that have been held back for Eminent Domain II: Legislative Action. ;)

Congrats.

onihero
Offline
Joined: 01/24/2010
Graphic Design

The graphic design on the rules (and cards) is very well done.

One thing. On page 5 in the Planet Cards section, Example 1 describes a planet card that has a Warfare Symbol on it. The image next to the example does not have a Warfare Symbol on it. I know that the image of the card does not directly relate to the example, but thats where I looked to see the Warfare Symbol (since the image is next to the example, my eyes naturally went there to see what the example was talking about). Perhaps using a different planet card that does have a Warfare Symbol on it would be better for that image?

Looks like a fun game.

ilta
ilta's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/05/2008
> Indeed, you ALREADY wanted

> Indeed, you ALREADY wanted to buy my game - by posting the rules I just made you aware of that fact ;)

Now, see, we're getting into some heady philosophical questions here. Did that "want" for the game already exist, waiting to be discovered, or was it created by you (however unintentionally and completely innocently)? And if it existed already, and you were merely illuminating it, does that make the act of eliciting that hidden desire less amazing, or more so?

And what of free will?

...

clearly I need to go to sleep. Rules look great. I posted my incredibly long nitpicks on the BGG thread.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut