Subject: MN: Reworking the Ruleset

From: "Dunx (Duncan Ellis)" <DELLIS@u...>
Date: 19 Mar 99 16:06:32 +0000

Just thought I'd spang a couple of ideas off into the ether about 
reorganising the ruleset, especially the 1.x sections. 

Currently the ruleset is organised by concept, which isn't in itself a bad 
thing, but makes the rules difficult to read through and navigate. 

What I propose are the following broad changes - 

1. move the Nomic mechanics to the end - I know that these are the bedrock 
of the whole process, but they are also largely static and not really 
the focus of the game. I suggest renumbering section 0 to section A or 
something (effectively treating it as an appendix) and putting it at the
end of the ruleset document so that the first thing a new reader sees 
after the contents page is the Vanilla ruleset. 

2. reorganise the Vanilla ruleset around explaining the GSD - this is 
already partly in place but could do with being more clearly described. 
However, I'm thinking that section 1.2 should be promoted to the 
beginning of the ruleset, with the objectives and Turn mechanics 
following. 

3. structure Action descriptions differently - currently the Action 
descriptions are loosely grouped by their effect (states of play, 
shunts, blocks, etc) although there is a rather unsightly lump of 
general Actions in section 1.7. 

What I suggest is reorganising the Action descriptions by what kind 
of tokens they cost - since the roles of Reds, Blues, etc are quite 
well-defined this would have the effect of clustering Actions by the 
desired effect ("I want to really ruin player X's day...") and also by 
what tokens were to hand ("Hmm... I've only got Black Tokens left."). 

Obviously, there are misfits in this scheme, but I would have thought 
we can designate a primary colour (eg the Freem clamp costs a Red and a 
Green, but since it attacks another Player the Red should be considered 
primary). 

4. make tables the primary reference - there are several useful tables at 
different points in the ruleset. These should be grouped in one place 
near the beginning to make finding them easier, and to provide a cleaner 
way in. 

5. extend the Glossary - this is already a useful feature of the ruleset, 
but I think it could be useful to extend it to include conceptual 
descriptions that don't fit in elsewhere (yes, I know it's a bit kitchen
sink - but I think in a game of this type there always has to be a 
section called 'miscellaneous'). 

You'll note that I haven't talked about Special Rulesets - I don't think 
those can be organised any better than they are already, since by definition
they have to be grouped by specialisation. 

What do people think? Would this be better or worse than the existing
format? 

-- 
Dunx 
IRL: Duncan Ellis, Senior Software Engineer, Business Modelers, Oracle 
<I work for Oracle, I don't speak for them>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/l-nomic-d
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com