set range

ReverendRevolver wrote:

It wouldn't NEED to be in rules, as there's the rule about cards trumping rules when the two contradict, but possibly detailed play summary thing?
The reminder text is sufficient to illustrate what it does, from my experience with such effects.

This is less about the rules, and more about a keyword or keyphrase being written on the card, while not being mentioned in the rulebook. Since its not even a rule but a definition of what "set range" means, it should be mentioned in the rulebook in my opinion.

As pointed out by Ankha elsewhere, reminder text is not necessary. In this case, a player can't figure out what a card does either by looking at the card or by going through rulebook. That, in my opinion, is wrong. Rulebook should at the very least include the definitions of such keywords in the glossary. Ruling is not missing, definition is.

Overall, the rulings for VTES are all over the place and should be coalesced into a single place (rulebook) better.

I agree 1000% that the rulings need to exist in a more accessible way, and it being 2018, an app that contains all relevant rulings that involve a given card when searched is probably the most efficient way.(dont get me wrong, googling it on a phones faster than the old way, but there's room for improvement by folks more capable than myself. )
Operating on the premises that limited was key worded, and reminder text isn't needed on its cards, I do concede that "Set"(not the Antideluvian but the range kind) may need to be in a detailed rulebook. I just hate how cluttered the rules are with Red List, Trophy, etc. Reading it, coming in new all those years ago, many things are in hindsight like quicksand: when you're like 7 years old and keep seeing quicksand in movies and such, you think "I better watch out for that, damn." But then you get older and realize thousands of things are probably trying to kill you, but quicksand isn't really one of them.
The rulebook could benefit from basic and advanced rules. That way we could try to hack away at the learning curve while still being practice about things being in the rules.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

That way we could try to hack away at the learning curve while still being practice about things being in the rules.

One way to ease this up is not to use complicated concepts or cards in the first decks you hand out to new players.

Some Finns did five such demo decks that have been used with good experience.

To keep it more accessible they contain rather few different cards and only cards that have limited amount of text too.

Check them out:
drive.google.com/file/d/1lakfvGPt1nb4-7Of_nJMwCv80leOao_Z/view

Those look straight forward enough, I haven't tried teaching more than 1 person to play at a time in years, but I used mono mono and mono

I was chiefly referring to the rulebook being intimidating as is, and being reluctant to add more keywords. I wouldn't start someone with a sniper rifle/selective silence deck. That's mean; experienced players who routinely use selective silence rarely win with it