I'd like to think so, but I've discovered wargame rules books can have a habit of presuming prior knowledge about a system by the reader. Other games can have this problem, but wargames seem to do it with reckless glee (imo). The already initiated don't notice, because they know the system already. - ThreadSky

watchitplayed.tv • 74 days ago

I'd like to think so, but I've discovered wargame rules books can have a habit of presuming prior knowledge about a system by the reader. Other games can have this problem, but wargames seem to do it with reckless glee (imo). The already initiated don't notice, because they know the system already.

Comments

ccxvii.bsky.social•74 days ago

Of the Columbia block games, I think Julius Caesar has the best and most complete rulebook. It assumes the least amount of prior knowledge (probably because it's simpler than the others and they didn't have to cut anything to fit the rules onto 8 pages).

fredserval.bsky.social•74 days ago

EXACTLY

ccxvii.bsky.social•74 days ago

If you don't have a physical copy, you can always play the online version I created at https://rally-the-troops.com/julius-caesar

mattthr.bsky.social•74 days ago

A lot of these games are too swingy for my tastes, Richard III included. Hammer of the Scots is better but it runs longer and whole games can turn on whether Wallace fluffs his dice early on. My favourite is probably the old silver box version of Napleon. Later versions add pointless time/blocks

ccxvii.bsky.social•74 days ago

They're the right amount of swingy for me! That Hammer runs a bit longer allows for spectacular come-backs. Luck is not as decisive a factor in HOTS as you would imagine, as evidenced by several of the best players on RTT having win rates near 90%.

mattthr.bsky.social•74 days ago

Wow, that's pretty conclusive proof. I'm really surprised: I always felt that if Wallace fell early - or indeed if he rolled a full house of hits and wiped out an English expedition force - that was pretty much game over. Perhaps I should revisit it.

mattthr.bsky.social•74 days ago

It's this. To my annoyance BGG seems to have amalgamated all the editions in one entry, even though they're very substantially different, while it will have completely separate entries for editions of 100% similar eurogames that have different coloured wooden blocks https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1662/napoleon-the-waterloo-campaign-1815

watchitplayed.tv•74 days ago

THAT'S what I'm interested in. And hey, if this user rates it a 10, who am I to argue?

watchitplayed.tv•74 days ago

So where I might normally say "Interested in a game? Pick the theme you like best and dive in!", for wargames I always say "Here's the game you're most likely to be able to decipher from the rules... maybe. Then from there, if you like the system, go for theme next".

watchitplayed.tv•74 days ago

Again, not an problem exclusive to wargames and certainly not every wargame, but I do find I encounter it more often there.

fredserval.bsky.social•74 days ago

I agree, and this is why I would start with Julius Caesar, it should give you a solid basis to understand the basics of the system and THEN you branch out.

koboldcurrychef.bsky.social•74 days ago

I don't want to click the link to see how, but it's hilarious that this thread started with a manga model and is now talking about Julius Caesar...

fredserval.bsky.social•74 days ago

But when you think about it, it makes so much sense.

drcrossbows.bsky.social•74 days ago

I don't see much of a difference in complexity between Julius Caesar, Hammer of the Scots, and Richard III. Crusader Rex is a bit more fiddly (but I recall some French YouTuber once recommended it over JC 🤔).

I found the rulebooks for the ACW ones were a little worse though.

drcrossbows.bsky.social•74 days ago

On rulebooks, I think the issue for some Columbia titles is that they wanted them to be 8 pages pretty much across the board (possibly a production thing). Sometimes that works great, other times they're cramming 10-12 pages of rules into 8 and rely on players' prior knowledge to fill in the gaps.

ccxvii.bsky.social•74 days ago

The Crusader Rex rulebook is tough. There are a lot of cases that regularly occur during play that aren't covered explicitly in the rules and require inventive reading and a lot of filling in the blanks.

celacanto.bsky.social•74 days ago

I never played Julius Caesar. But hammer of the Scots its a game that personally I don't want to play again, but I still recommend to start with this kind of games.

It a matter that with the winter reset all the plays were too similar, but the game will be great for a few plays for new players

meepleriot.bsky.social•74 days ago

For every game system, there should be that one gateway game, everyone can agree on. Like Pax Pamir for Pax Games, A Gest of Robin Hood for COIN, and so on...

watchitplayed.tv•74 days ago

That's a good strategy as a publisher, but I suppose my main push would be that all rule books teach you the game within the box "as if you've never played it before" - not presume you've played another game like it prior, or that "you'll figure it out if we just tell you all the separate bits".

meepleriot.bsky.social•74 days ago

For sure they should do that. And I think most rulebooks succeed in that. What I'm trying to say is, that there should be games for every series or game-family, that ease you into that particular system. Like starting COIN with Pendragon? No one would recommend that. A Gest of Robin Hood? Hell yeah!

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply