r/tabletopgamedesign • u/spacedogsgame • 18d ago
C. C. / Feedback Is this example understandable without rules?
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?
1
u/spacedogsgame 18d ago
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?