file Black Chantry Rulebook Feedback

09 Feb 2019 14:12 #93381 by Mewcat

I am no english native speaker so maybe I don't understand some subtlety but it seems pretty forward to me..


So, for you, the rulebook explains this clearly enough that you would not make a mistake?

For me it does.

Locking TO do something and locking as a separate effect is clear.


The reason for this confusion is due to poor or nonexistent card templating. The rules can't really clear this up because the cards don't make any meaningful distinction between costs and effects.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Bloodartist

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Feb 2019 16:42 #93391 by Damnans
I would like to remind you that we wanted feedback on the PDF Rulebook available here:

www.blackchantry.com/rulebook/

Which should match the online one on vekn.net.

Most of the errors that have been reported so far in this thread are not in the PDF Rulebook on www.blackchantry.com.

:vtes: V:EKN Website Coordinator

:baal: :AUS: :DAI: :FOR: :OBF: :PRE: :MAL: :STR: :flight: :cap11:
The following user(s) said Thank You: Lönkka

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Feb 2019 20:07 #93396 by Mewcat
6.5.4 uses the same unclear language as before. Clearly state that diablarie at someone else's vamp is 0 stealth.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Damnans

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Feb 2019 20:14 - 10 Feb 2019 20:20 #93398 by Mewcat
6.1.3 some clarification of equipping with something already in play would be helpful. Might be best to call it something else and say the acting minion is considered to have equipped all transferred equipment.

I find this confusing as a cardless action that requires a card. I mean can you just announce equip with card in play even if nothing is in play? Is it really just an equip action?
Last edit: 10 Feb 2019 20:20 by Mewcat.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Damnans

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Feb 2019 22:04 #93400 by kschaefer
Thanks, Damnans for the reminder, but I could have sworn when I started the thread the only rulebook I was viewing was the PDF. That being said, vulnerability no longer appears, so great.

Regarding 6.1.3:

I find this confusing as a cardless action that requires a card. I mean can you just announce equip with card in play even if nothing is in play? Is it really just an equip action?

Well if we call it something else, that potentially breaks current game interactions. For instance, NRA PAC works with equipping from the hand or from another minion.

I would suggest that it could be broken into two subsections:
6.1.3.1 Equipping from the hand

6.1.3.2 Equipping from a minion in play. To Mewcat's point you can refer people to the requirements section, while reminding them that you can only take this action if there is a valid target. Constantly reiterating the general requirements for actions throughout will help reenforce the general requirements.

Furthermore this section should make it clear that you can equip from a minion in torpor. This is currently allowed by the rules because of their wording, but it isn't always clear to people that this is an option. I know, I've had to site the rulebook almost every time I do this.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Feb 2019 23:43 - 10 Feb 2019 23:45 #93401 by TwoRazorReign
I will point to one sentence that epitomizes some major issues with the rulebook I think should be given attention (and that maybe most people are not thinking about):

"Being locked or unlocked doesn't matter for combat. Locked minions fight just the same as unlocked minions"

First of all, "doesn't matter for combat" is such a mealy mouthed way to explain that locked and unlocked minions are both able to enter combat. Language like this appears all over the rulebook. I mean, I seriously would have no clue what this means if I were reading the rulebook cold without any prior knowledge gained from playing VTES. Unclear and unhelpful language like this needs to be rewritten for clarity. One should be able to read the rulebook cold and not have to guess the meaning of its unclear language.

Second, minions don't "fight." They enter combat, maneuver, choose strike, press, etc. There are many examples of this type of "folksy" language in the rulebook that appear to be involving flavor from the RPG but just end up adding extra fat. This extra fat gets in the way of not only reader comprehension ("where is the "enter fight" step again?"), but also optimal word counts, especially in a rulebook for a game this complex. The rulebook should not be the place to add "flavor," it should simply codify the rules. Leave the flavor to the cards.

Finally, to my most important point: What really should be stated here is that minions do not lock for simply entering combat. Namely, if a minion enters combat by some means other than blocking an action, they do not lock by default.

The only instance of entering combat the rulebook describes is via blocking an action. I'm thinking this is because the most common (and maybe only) way to enter combat without use of a card is via blocking an action. The problem is, this current (and sole) description of combat could lead one to believe that minions lock whenever they enter combat:

"If the action is blocked...the blocking minion is locked and enters combat with the acting minion"

In this sentence, it's unclear what's causing the minion to lock. Entering combat, or the successful block? This is another potential place where it could be explained better that entering combat does not lock a minion.

Here are my proposed fixes:

"Being locked or unlocked doesn't matter for combat. Locked minions fight just the same as unlocked minions"locked and unlocked minions are both able to enter combat. A minion does not lock for entering combat."

"If the action is blocked...the blocking minion is locked as a result of the successful block and enters combat with the acting minion"
Last edit: 10 Feb 2019 23:45 by TwoRazorReign.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kraus, self biased

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.145 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum