Reply: Runewars:: Rules:: Re: Second Play - Still confused

by sigmazero13

MrMT wrote:

This and a dozen+ previous posts increasingly make me feel this game could do with more work.

Don't get me wrong - I like it a lot, and wish I could get it to the table. But it's just got too many rules to be attractive and intuitive to the majority of potential players.
...

The frustration is that it seems this could work more simply; where everything makes sense/falls into place without bible-sized faqs. The revised edition was a chance to do this, and did, indeed, clarify a few things, but I feel it could have gone further.

Frankly, I disagree. If it was made simpler, it would be a very different game, and would have nearly the same appeal to me.

This isn't a game I would introduce to non-gamers. It wasn't meant to be that kind of game. I have plenty of other games that fit that bill. I don't think it would be worth it to strip the many layers of strategy from the game just to appeal to a more casual crowd.

The rules, overall, are not that complex. Many (most?) of the questions in the FAQs (official and my compiled rulings document) don't really come from the rules themselves but from the interactions between various cards and components. And many of those can be deduced from the rules as written - the reason they are addressed in the FAQs is simply to confirm those deductions.

The game works well. Perfect? Perhaps not, but I don't think such a thing exists, as everyone will have things they like/dislike about a game. But this game continues to hold one of my few 10 ratings, because even after many dozens of plays, it continues to be fun and challenging, which most "basic" games fail to do for me.