Re: The Stack-and reasons why I cant Shut up

["Matt Worden" <Brykovian@...>]

It seems that a good deal of the questions and issues you are working 
through, Eric, have to do with how to communicate not only your 
game's rules, but how to work with the piecepack as well.

When I write game rules, especially those for piecepack games, I 
assume a couple of things about the people who will be reading them 
later on in order to player the game:  They willingly chose to 
attempt playing the game, which probably means they have experience 
playing some type of games in the past.  However, they may not have 
experience with the piecepack (or whatever set of components the game 
uses), nor with the genre the game fits in.  They are most likely 
able to read and comprehend English at a junior high level, or 
otherwise have somewhere to go for help if needed.

With those things said, I usually just spell out what I think the 
player needs to know in as simple and short of phrases as possible, 
while avoiding shorthand most of the time.  If a term is specific to 
gaming, or to the genre -- take "orthogonal" for example -- I usually 
make a point of clearly defining it early in the rules, then continue 
using it later on.

With the piecepack, specifically, I assume that most people -- even 
those with no piecepack experience -- will be able to tell what I 
mean when I use the terms "tile", "coin", "dice" or "pawn".  And when 
I mention the various values and suit names.  Since there are really 
very few different types of components in the piecepack, I would go 
ahead and write out exactly what I need the player to do.  For 
example: "Each player picks a suit, and gets all tiles, coins, the 
die, and the pawn marked for that suit."  or "Separate out the Moon 
coins, shuffle them suit-side-up, and organize them into a stack."

I believe most people -- piecepackers or not, gamers or not -- should 
be able to "get the jest" of what I'm after in the rules.

Hope that helps,
-Bryk



--- In piecepack@yahoogroups.com, "Electronicwaffle" 
<electronicwaffle@y...> wrote:
> 
> > We have been calling this a "stash" (after Icehouse) or Stack on 
> the
> > mailing list.  But, as not all players of piecepack games have 
> memorized
> > the piecepack glossary, you should just spell it out in any rule 
> set you
> > write..
> > 
> > -- 
> > mark@b...
> > mark.a.biggar@c...
> 
> Yes, I beleive I was the one who suggested the 1/4th of a PP have a 
> term.
> 
> Let me be more specific. 
> 
> When not instructing the player to take the entire stack, how 
should 
> this be done. I am working on yet another Ruleset as we speak, my 
> most difficult yet, and I am trying to be concise as possible, 
while 
> still remembering that I have to spell it all out. As in Berlin, I 
> Always define a Piecepack Stack when I mention it.  
> 
> This new Ruleset, which I will make public at a later date, is so 
> easily understood with pictures instead of words. I do not have a 
> camera, or even a scanner, It is hard to put words to what I see. 
> Yes, this game can not even be represented in my Piecepack Workshop 
> Applet. As I have two games in the ruleset in progress section,  
and 
> three waiting for the next comp, I dont wish to overwhelm the group 
> with yet another game of mine at this time. (For those keeping 
track 
> and reading all of my messages, this is my second game I am holding 
> on to for the time being.) I do not mean to boast, but I feel that 
I 
> should explain why I am asking so many questions recently, and at 
> the same time, I dont want all of my *new* rulesets to all blend 
> together, by having them all be released at the same time.
> 
> I guess all of theese Ideas prove why I suffer from ADHD, funny, I 
> think I enjoy it.
> 
> Eric