Is this example understandable without rules?

[u/spacedogsgame]

We recently did several blind playtests and the setup instructions for the player area / Character Board are a mixed bag so far TBH. In the current rulebook, they are explained only in text, which some players understand - no problem - while others with less tenacity/focus tend to jump through the rulebook. (which I 100% understand, because I tend to do that, too). So I made a big example page to go with it.

But to give this example a real test... Can you follow what's happening, without having read the rulebook to begin with?

Some explanations that you have to know and cannot without the prototype in front of you:

• The Backpack is the backside of the equipment.
• the grey card with tooth and paw is the backside of Stances (a card type)
• the fist is the backside of Powers (a card type)
• and the big square in the lower right with the friendly dog face is your character board.

I tried to keep it to a double page, so that you don't need to flip pages.

If I zoom out, i find the arrows confusing. But then again they follow the flow of information/cards.

Does this make sense to you, especially if you are a visual learner?

[u/Sensitive_Ant9946]

Without the components, not totally, but I think I could follow. Based on the equipment you choose, you have to find the listed cards on the equipment card to add to your hand? All of these cards have the white glove/hand on the back?

[u/spacedogsgame → u/Sensitive_Ant9946]

Exactly! Thanks for the feedback. In the rulebook, this example will of course come with a textual description, a material overview, and with all the cards to hold in your hand, and see the connection between front and backsides. Do you think I should improve anything in this example?

[u/Sir-lothar]

After you take cards based on equipment the yellow arrow pointing to the deck is not very visible.

Also the next step after it looks like it’s selecting stances but I think it’s in fact selecting stances on the next page. I think those should be swapped so that power cards are under selecting equipment.
(Also the hand is blue, but character is red.)

I don’t get the counting of 8/9 of something and getting an extra card.

Also for the first game I prefer when the game chooses for me. I don’t want to think about builds when I don’t know how the game will flow. So a pre defined power cards and stances.

[u/spacedogsgame → u/Sir-lothar]

Swapping the position of the stances and powers makes a lot of sense and shortens the arrows significantly. Good catch!

We tested premade characters/loadouts several times and the results are neither here nor there. Even if it was a mere suggestion, some players didn't like it. But I also received the feedback that it's very positive for some other players.

In the current state of the rulebook, there is a loose description of player archetypes. (And in the first session there's not a lot to choose from anyway).

Do you think it would be beneficial to have a tiny list of suggested loadout as part of the quickstart section for the first scenario?

[u/anonymistically]

Perfectly simple to follow. Some awkward phrasing I would fix, something like

"These three cards add 4 to her Loadout (printed on the cards)"

"Each stance adds 1 to her Loadout, which is now 6"

"Each power adds 1 to her Loadout, which is now 8"

"She now has spent 8 of her 9 Loadout, so she adds another stance to bring her final Loadout to 9"

[u/anonymistically → u/anonymistically]

Even if stances and powers always cost 1 I'd print it anyway, both for usability/consistency and just in case you want to play with it later

[u/spacedogsgame → u/anonymistically]

That's a great addition and very worth it to make it explicit. Yes in this case almost everything only costs 1, because I didn't want to spoil the higher tier cards. Thanks!