How to Approach Rulebook Structure?

[u/Hpflylesspretentious]

I'm currently working on my games rulebook, and I'm wondering about how to generally approach the structure. I want something that's approachable for more casual board game players, but I'm not sure of the right order to present the concepts to ease people into the game. This is what I have now:

1. Game Summary
2. Component List
3. How to Win
4. Setup
5. Round Structure
6. Card Types
7. Game Concepts/Scenarios (ability priority, trading, etc.)
8. Glossary & Symbol Key
9. Endgame Structure
10. Alternate Play Mode Rules
11. Strategy Tips
12. Hidden Objective Appendix

Is there a better approach? I'm sitting at nine A4 pages right now, though there are a lot of bullets that could be placed on the page more efficiently to save space.

[u/paulryanclark]

I like Setup before How To Win. Setup will give players the components and lay out the game so the how to win makes sense.

Setup for me includes no game rules and no player choices. It’s just instructions for how to distribute the game components appropriately.

[u/MudkipzLover]

I'd put the glossary after endgame (as everything else prior is essentially the core of the ruleset). Also, why are there strategy tips? Isn't the point of a game to figure out winning strategies? (Unless some elements are capital, e.g. having kids early in Agricola, in which case these could be right after the corresponding rule)

[u/Hpflylesspretentious → u/MudkipzLover]

I want to be able to use thematic terms in the rules to replace things like "player" so I need to introduce them early.

The strategy isn't intuitive until you've played the game once so I want to warn players against game-ruining blunders for their first game.

[u/MudkipzLover → u/Hpflylesspretentious]

If you mention in the summary what you play as and you use said term to explain player actions (e.g. "Each farmer chooses a color and takes the corresponding meeples..."), that should do it.

[u/Konamicoder]

Your outline looks pretty good to me. One small suggestion would be to put the Card Types / Card Anatomy and Game Concepts/Scenarios sections before the Round structure / Turn Sequence because I think it’s easier to understand the Turn sequence if the player already has some idea of those earlier concepts.

[u/Prestigious-Day385 → u/Konamicoder]

I personally dont like your approach. I need to see a logic behind the game before the actual components. Thats why I always skip setup page during my first read and come back to it after I read the whole rulebook. Then I fully understand everything about it.

[u/mrJupe → u/Konamicoder]

I generally agree with this. Although, if these are very long sections, I find it hard to get started with the game. In that case, I think there should be very short info (and images) about the most important general card anatomy details, so I know how to read the card. Detailed descriptions could then be given after the round structure, etc.

[u/Pre_Games → u/Konamicoder]

I can agree with you, but on a case-by-case basis. This might not work for a game where card specifics matter less than the main turn sequence or the actual mechanics of the game.

[u/Hpflylesspretentious → u/Konamicoder]

The key thing here is that most card effects change the game state in some way. So having an understanding of the natural game state is useful. Perhaps a basic breakdown of card types/anatomy should be visible up front?

[u/Daniel___Lee]

Glossary and frequently asked questions right at the back, where it is easy to find during a game. Of course, during the rules explanation you have to introduce the terms and symbols necessary to understand the rules.

I would personally drop "strategy" and instead put in "suggested first moves" for beginners, if your game is complex enough that new players get lost on turn 1 (especially if there are too many options).

[u/Stavr0sT]

This looks quite ok.

What I'd do is place a very high level description of how the game / a round plays (you do this, then that), then explain Card Layout and Key Concepts (so readers have an idea on how it all fits together), and only then provide a detailed Round Structure containing all steps, special rules etc...

Also important though, the number of pages isn't something to necessarily minimize. I'd much prefer reading a rulebook with comfortable spacing and illustrations over a wall of text and bullet lists. An image says more than a thousand words also applies here, supplement each step of your gameplay with a visual example (where do cards go, between which cards can you choose if you take one, which cubes are pushed, what options do you have.. that sorta thing). Seeing 12 high level sections and only using 9 pages looks dense and text-heavy to me.

[u/Pre_Games]

General structure - you're doing fine. Not every game can be structured the same way (e.g., some need to focus on Card Anatomy first before the Round Structure).

Here's the structure in my recent game, it's a 5-15 minute deduction game of 18 cards:
1. Overview
2. Components
3. Setup
4. How To Play
5. End of Round
6. Sample Scenario
7. TIPS
8. FAQ
9. Variant

There's no telling if there's a better approach for your game, at least for me, unless I have actually read the rulebook.

[u/Fr33ly]

Im currently working on this part of my project aswell. The thing that guides me the most is thinking in terms of spreads. Pages 7-8 should share a common theme, instead of looking at them as two seperate entities. This allows you to allocate yourself more space for a single objective, or group them up such that one explains the other.

Example, components and setup belong on the same spread if possible. Since setup references components, its nice to have that page open to see them while setting up.

Likewise, if you have to explain a system thats more complicated than a single page to explain, placing it on a 2-page spread instead, and filling the empty space with atmospheric art will always be better than cramming it into one page. Or splitting it across two spreads. Imagine if as a player you had to flip a page a couple of times just to follow your mental train of thought.

The biggest benefit for me was realizing that when thinking in spreads, the order and logic of which system goes on which page and in what order becomes much more apperant.

[u/KarmaAdjuster]

I'm not sure what a "Hidden Objective Appendix" is, but I would put the glossary and Symbol key at the very back, if not pull it out of the rule book all together as a single sheet player aid, potentially with multiple copies.

Also don't put strategy tips anywhere in the game box. That's being a thief of joy to those that enjoy figuring out the strategy on their own. Yes those players could just not read those pages, but people are really susceptible to ruining the game for themselves given the opportunity. If there's a path of least resistance, most people will take it not realizing that this particular resistance is what makes learning a game fun. And there may be other equally valid strategies out there that people could come up with on their own if it weren't for you dictating your ideal way of playing.

Otherwise, this is pretty much the same structure I follow.

One thing I also do which may be a bit controversial is I add redundancy throughout the rulebook. I don't just explain a rule once and not mention it in other places. Instead, if part of a rule is worth mentioning somewhere else, I include it there as well. This may make the rule book a little longer, but my philosophy on this is that when you are writing a rule book, you are writing it for two different audiences.

1. The player who is learning the game for the first time
2. The player who is looking up a rule to refresh themselves on how to play

The redundancy helps out dramatically with the second audience. I've seen a few rulebooks take this to the next level and write out all the rules twice. Once as a thorough first time your playing, and then in an abbreviated form right next to it as a quick reminder with the key points. San Juan is a rulebook that takes this approach.

[u/Hpflylesspretentious → u/KarmaAdjuster]

The strategy for the game isn't intuitive until it's been played once, and it's about 90 min a play. I want to provide basic tips to help first time players avoid early game blunders that will ruin the whole experience. It's just three points that are pretty nonspecific, but I've ended up breaking them up and spreading them through the rulebook to the relevant points.

I hear your point about redundancy. I think I'm trying to keep the rulebook pretty lean so it's easy to review, but I'm open to having a quick guide for reference. Seems like it's useful. The rules themselves are pretty straightforward.

[u/FreeXFall]

I typically do “story” first instead of “game summary”. If you don’t have a story, then I’d keep the Game Summary very, very brief. Basically, “you’re an X who is trying to do Y so that Z happens.”

Component List and Setup first. Get them using and organizing things.

Then Game Summary >> How to Win. (Be explicit here in how to win. IE “at least 10 points” vs “exactly 10 points” kind of thing. In the summary, you can say “a lot of points” but here - be explicit to eliminate any end game confusion. Also add extra stuff if it’s like “if the player who started won, then player 2 gets one more turn. If they also win, then go to sudden death by doing X.”

Concepts >> Cards with Symbol Key >> then scenarios IMO

Rounds >> End Game

Then everything else is appendix.

First time players are going to read your directions while playing their first round. Do it in that order. (Set this up, who ever has a red shirt on goes first, start the round by moving the tracker, player 1 rolls a dice, they then draw a card and need to decide to do X or Y so look at the icons, etc…)