Improving the Rulebook texts

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

  • Improving the Rulebook texts

    This thread is for all who feel the texts in the rulebook needs to be prettier (as parts are neigh unreadable, and the rest is up for love) , and for those that want to contribute. I'll post some examples from other threads and every now and then I'll dump in text that needs love.
    Booooooaaaaaarsssss .... Chaaaaaaaaaaaaaarge !!!

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Pellegrim ().

  • Example 1

    Original to-wound text:
    If an attack has a Strength value, it must successfully wound the target to have a chance to harm it. To make a to woundroll, roll a D6 for each hit. The difference between the Strength of the attack and the Resilience Characteristic of the defender determines the needed roll to successfully wound the target. An attack with Strength 0 cannot wound.

    Improvement A:
    To cause a wound, each attack needs to wound it's target by rolling a D6, using the attackers strength, the targets resilience and the table below. Exceptions: 1. some units automatically wound their target. 2: attacks at Strength 0 cant cause wounds.

    Improvement B:
    To Wound: Consult the To-Wound table below, comparing the Strength value of the attack and the Resilience value of the target. This is the roll required to wound the target. Roll a D6 for each successful hit in order to obtain the number of afflicted wounds.
    Booooooaaaaaarsssss .... Chaaaaaaaaaaaaaarge !!!
  • Example 2

    Deployment Type
    Determine which Deployment Type to use. If no outside source (e.g. tournament organiser, campaign rules, etc.) tells you what Deployment Type to use, players may choose which one to play. If they cannot agree, randomise by rolling a D6 and consulting the following list.

    1: Frontline Clash The Table is divided into halves by a straight line through the centre of the board, parallel to the table’s long edges. DeploymentZones are areas more than 12″ away from this line

    Improvement A
    Deployment Type
    An army is deployed using Deployment Types. Either roll a D6 and choose the corresponding numbered deployment type, or pick one if you and your opponent can agree.

    Frontline Clash:
    [image] The Table is divided in two equal halves, lengthwise, with the deployment zones 24" apart.

    Dawn Assault:
    [image] The Table is divided in two equal halves lengthwise, with the deployment zones 24" apart. Exceptions: 1. Players may pick up to two units to deploy using the Ambush rules, with the exception that they must arrive touching the location marked in the image.

    Counterthrust:
    The Table is divided in two equal halves lengthwise, with the deployment zones 16" apart Exceptions: 1. Players can only deploy 1 unit (can not be a character) per turn until there are 6 units on the table in total. 2. Unit's need to keep a distance of 20" between them, regardless of the deployment zones.

    Encircle:
    [image] (wip)

    Refused Flank:
    [image] The Table is divided in two equal halves diagonally, with the deployment zones 18" (?) apart.

    Marching Columns:
    [image] The Table is divided in two equal halves lengthwise, with the deployment zones 24" apart. Exceptions: 1. Players can only deploy 1 unit (can not be a character) per turn until there are 6 units on the table in total. 2. The second unit a player deploys needs to be further away from the marked short side of the table then the first unit, measured from the center of the unit. The third unit must subsequently be further away from the second unit. War machines, characters and scouts ignore these rules. 3. Players need to deploy the Players may choose any number of units (not being scouts or ambushers) to be Delayed. Delayed units deploy using the Ambush rules, with the exception that they must arrive as close as possible to the center location marked in the image.[/image]
    Booooooaaaaaarsssss .... Chaaaaaaaaaaaaaarge !!!
  • To be honest, the wording of the to-wound section is not so bad. I would instead increase readiness by minor tweaks, grouping exceptions and setting a special color for them. This way, players interested in quickly grasping the basic rules will read only the black parts while advanced players will also read the gray parts.

    Before:

    If an attack has a Strength value, it must successfully wound the target to have a chance to harm it. To make a towound roll, roll a D6 for each hit. The difference between the Strength of the attack and the Resilience Characteristic of the defender determines the needed roll to successfully wound the target. See the Table 5. below.

    A natural roll of ‘6’ will always succeed and a natural roll of ‘1’ will always fail. The player that inflicted the hit makes a to-wound roll for each attack that hit the target. A successful to-wound roll causes a wound; proceed to Armour Saves and Armour Modifiers. If the attack does not have a Strength value, follow the rules given for that particular attack.

    [to-wound table]





    After:

    If an attack has a Strength value, it must successfully wound the target to have a chance to harm it.
    To make a to-wound roll, roll a D6 for each hit: the difference between the Strength of the attack and the Resilience of the defender determines the needed roll to successfully wound the target:

    [to-wound table]

    A successful to-wound roll causes a wound; proceed to Armour Saves and Armour Modifiers.

    • If the attack does not have a Strength value, follow the rules given for that particular attack.
    • A natural roll of ‘6’ will always succeed and a natural roll of ‘1’ will always fail.
    • The player that inflicted the hit makes a to-wound roll for each attack that hit the target.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by joel127 ().

  • You never start a rules section that is about how-to-wound with the text "if an attack has a strength value ..."

    Just never. ever. Because it is not intuitive.

    It's key to understand that before making changes.

    Say you make rules about how to buy a piece of bread at a bakery, which can only be done between 11-12h.

    Would you ever start that rule with "Between 11-12h you can go to a a bakery and buy bread"?

    No never. Why? Because you emphasize the time, which is make it seem like you are making a timetable / planning, not a rule book. You are trying to bring across you main message first, and then any side issues.
    Booooooaaaaaarsssss .... Chaaaaaaaaaaaaaarge !!!
  • Sry to come off harsh btw! .. it's because in the previous thread we were in a positive flow and getting some improvements done. And the need for improvement that widely recognised. Locally I have people saying the can not be bother with learning the new rules, cause they are A changing constantly and B worded terribly. This comes from people supporting T9A without negativity so far. All the while GW and Mantic are pumping out easy to understand and play models and games. So I get a bit annoyed sometime. It's 5 to 12 imo.
    Booooooaaaaaarsssss .... Chaaaaaaaaaaaaaarge !!!
  • No worry, this is also my wish to try to make the book better. However English is not my first language, and the first line did not strike me as problematic (I still don't understand the issue tbh). I guess different people have different issues with the readability.

    [EDIT] I think I understand, you don't like that the rule starts with an exception (no strength) ? The thing is if the attack have no strength value, the whole section is obsolete, so we cannot write it as an exception.

    Anyway, I don't write the rules, this was just a suggestion to show that the readability can be increased if we split the exceptions and the main rules.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by joel127 ().

  • To make a to-wound roll, roll a D6 for each hit. The difference between the Strength of the attack and the Resilience Characteristic of the defender determines the needed roll to successfully wound the target. See Table 5 below.

    [Table 5]

    For attacks without a Strength value, follow the rules given for that particular attack.

    A natural roll of ‘6’ will always succeed and a natural roll of ‘1’ will always fail.

    That's all the information you really need isn't it?

    The post was edited 1 time, last by theunwantedbeing ().

  • I like @joel127 suddgestuon of keeping specific exceptions separate from the main meat of the rule. Commonly we refer to the rules to deduce one of these off cases, but have to read an entire paragraph to find where it is hidden. Simply just having bullet points makes skimming the rules easier, even if there are the same number of words.
    I think the Example of the to wound section is probably too light on exceptions to totally warrant the bullet points, but the concept is great as far as organizing goes. Pelli I think your option A is 95% there, is just make line breaks for the individual exceptions so they stand out visually
  • If I had the willpower I'd write up a streamlined version of the whole book with simplified, conversational versions of the same rules:

    Original
    If an attack has a Strength value, it must successfully wound the target to have a chance to harm it. To make a to woundroll, roll a D6 for each hit. The difference between the Strength of the attack and the Resilience Characteristic of the defender determines the needed roll to successfully wound the target. An attack with Strength 0 cannot wound.

    Dan's Edition
    Okay you hit, now you need to wound. Pick up the dice that hit and roll them again and then consult the chart below, comparing the attacking model's strength against the defending model's resilience. Obviously Strength 0 can't wound.
  • The deployment zones are an interesting case. Honestly, I think the explanation of the diagram is not nearly as straightforward as the diagram. To that, I dont see a lot in terms of wording that will add additional context to the diagrams. Obviously, special deployment rules, such as CounterThrust, Dawn Assault, Marching Columns are important, but the description of how to layout the board is far clearer in the diagram.

    Should the paragraphs be removed? Probably not. Should they be the first thing that you read through for the purposes of understanding the deployment scenario? NO! They are merely a redundancy, and should therefore be placed subservient to the diagram. If for some reason there is a disagreement in how to decipher the diagram, then the wording is available.
  • Id argue they go under the diagram. I realize this is now nit picky and distracts from the greater purpose of rewriting, just throwing out the idea of seeing the diagram first, learning what you can from the diagram, then reading the wordy explanation of what the diagram already taught you. I see the words as supplementing the diagram, not the other way around. Therefore, they should be beneath said diagram.

    This is also consistent with scientific notation of figures, but that is more of a moot argument.
  • Name of the scenario first (obviously)
    Then the Diagram of how to deploy for that Scenario
    Then the text explaining anything not immediately obvious about the diagram

    We don't need to say " X" from the centre line" when the diagram clearly shows it.
    The same goes for anything else you can figure out from the diagram, it doesn't need to be stated so we should remove it, or at least move it to the end of the descriptive paragraph after the more important information.
  • Conditional Application p89
    Attack Attributes may only work against certain enemies, which are then stated in brackets after “against”. There may already be some piece of information relative to the rule specified between brackets, as in Multiple Wounds (2): then the conditions for the rule to work are written in the same brackets, after a comma. This can e.g. be all models from a given Army Book, with a given Model Rule, of a given Size or of a given Type. If the Attack Attribute is effective against more than one type of enemy, they are separated by commas. If no comma is used, this means that the rule works only against enemies that fulfil all criteria. For example, Multiple Wounds (2, against Large Beasts, Gigantic) means that Multiple Wounds can be used against models that are both Large and Beasts, as well as against models that are Gigantic.

    Attack Attributes with Conditional Application can only be applied when they are either allocated or distributed towards a Health Pool where all models fulfil the requirements.





    This is a complicated wall of text for something simple that should be very easily understood visually with some examples. Again, I use a different font for text that only experimented players need to read:

    Proposed improvement:

    The following formulation is used for conditional applications: Rule Name(..., against X, Y, ...)

    Eg: Multiple Wounds (2), but only against Large Beasts:

    ___Multiple Wounds (2, against Large Beasts)

    ___Multiple Wounds (2), but only against Large Beasts or Dwarven Holds models:
    ___Multiple Wounds (2, against Large Beasts, Dwarven Holds)

    Attack Attributes with conditional application can only be applied when they are either allocated or distributed
    towards a Health Pool where ALL models fulfill the requirements.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by joel127 ().

  • Wow, that is a duzy of a rule.

    I am trying to figure out a way to critique your fix, but I come up with nothing more elegant. Well done!

    It just occurred to me that we may have troubles simplifying rules to the right degree if we are repeating the "fixed" rules below the original rules.
    For instance, I never read that crazy rule block you offered. But I read thru that before reading your revision. If I had simply just read your revision, not ever seeing the original, I may have not understood the context of what you were trying to explain. Not saying this is necessarily the case here, but we should be mindful of that potential.

    As a slight aside, are there any "army specific" conditions anymore? My impression was they were all removed.
  • You are completely right, my version don't have a proper introduction. Also, the formula is not needed, here is a better version I think:


    Some Attack Attributes only apply to specific models; when this is the case, the word "against" is used:

    Eg: Multiple Wounds (2), but only against Large Beasts:
    ___Multiple Wounds (2, against Large Beasts)

    ___Multiple Wounds (2), but only against Large Beasts or Dwarven Holds models:
    ___Multiple Wounds (2, against Large Beasts, Dwarven Holds)

    Attack Attributes with conditional application can only be applied when they are either allocated or distributed towards a Health Pool where ALL models fulfill the requirements.





    I understand the need to have a more formal definition, but this comes at the expense of readability. My vision is to split the content into an easy to read part in black with the basic rules for beginners and intermediate players, and a part in gray-italic for the formal specifications, exceptions and other that benefit advanced and tournament players. The downside of this would be an even bigger rule book, but so much easier to read for humans.
  • Pellegrim wrote:

    Original to-wound text:
    If an attack has a Strength value, it must successfully wound the target to have a chance to harm it. To make a to woundroll, roll a D6 for each hit. The difference between the Strength of the attack and the Resilience Characteristic of the defender determines the needed roll to successfully wound the target. An attack with Strength 0 cannot wound.
    Here is the information you get from this, imagined as a first time reader, in the order you get it.
    -Attacks can have a Strength value.
    -You have to wound a target to hurt it.
    -For each hit I roll a die.
    -The difference between Attack Strength and Resilience tells me what I need to roll.
    -Strength 0 cannot wound.

    Pellegrim wrote:

    Improvement A:
    To cause a wound, each attack needs to wound it's target by rolling a D6, using the attackers strength, the targets resilience and the table below. Exceptions: 1. some units automatically wound their target. 2: attacks at Strength 0 cant cause wounds.
    The information I get from yours.
    -I can cause a wound.
    -I have to roll a dice.
    -I have to use the Attackers Strength.
    -I have to use the targets Resilience
    -There is a table.
    -Sometimes things wound automatically.
    -Strength 0 cannot wound.

    You used less words to convey less specific information. In fact, you even conveyed the wrong information, as Attackers Strength and Attack Strength are two different things (accounting for weapons). Your version of the text is open to interpretation, the original is not. You don't say what a wound is (that the model is hurt), you don't say where you get the dice to roll to wound from (from hits), you don't say how many dice you use per hit. You add in bit about some things wound automatically which will make new players wonder if their units do.

    As soon as you change the rules to be in a more casual tone you open them up to people bending them in different ways than intended.