What information are you looking for in an announcement for a new rule set?

[Codsticker]

In addition to what tikitang has listed which are probably the most important, I'd also like to have a brief synopsis on how command/control is handled; how combat is managed; how morale/combat fatigue is handled; is there activation, and is it random.

[lethallee61]

How many miniatures will I have to paint?

How hard will it be to learn/teach to others?

Do the rules come with a comprehensive index?

Is there any chance my gaming mates will be even slightly interested in playing the game?

[tikitang]

Some factors are harder to market than others.

For example, it's easy to specify details about play area, force size and scale.

It's not so easy to specify whether an individual's mates will be interested in playing it or not! 

[ced1106]

> +1 to this - a battle report goes a long way to explaining the game - and helps new players get started

Exactly that. If you're a retailer and have an advertising budget, okay, sure, tell us nothing about the rules and show us some art we've seen before. Your money.

But, if you're just someone doing this as a hobby project, post session reports *with photos* of your prototype. Maybe even put [Prototype] in your subject, since some of us are interested in game development as much as a new game on the market. Or like to look at lovely photos. (:

Reddit's miniature skirmish forum is pretty supportive of new games, so you can also post downloads of your rule sets there.

[Codsticker]

Is there any chance my gaming mates will be even slightly interested in playing the game?

Smartass!

[lethallee61]

I know my comment about gaming mates was definitely tongue in cheek, but sadly, I’ve also lost count of the number of new rules set I’ve bought, painted miniatures for and then sold, given away or just simply thrown in the bin because I can’t get anyone else interested in playing.

So yes, the purchase of any new rules set does depend on whether I think the overall effort will be worth it, regardless of the quality of the production.

[TheDaR]

Okay, I went through and tried to summarize everything from various posts into one mostly coherent list, and added a few more thoughts along the ay.

purchasing

• cost
• electronic or physical (or both)
• distributors to buy (or download) from
• expected market availability (US, EU, UK, etc)
• existing or expected future supplements
  • army/faction/list/period books
  • specific campaign or scenario books
  • supplemental rules for other game modes

physical

• miniature count required
• preferred scale of miniatures
• miniature basing
  • individual or group
  • square/round/hex/other
  • specific sizes (and counts if unit based)
• table size and expected terrain
• game-specific miniatures, terrain, etc
• additional accessories like special cards/tokens/dice needed

rules

• page count
• example pages (showing layout, diagrams, art, index/toc, etc)
• complexity level
• typical game duration
• "unique things" different from other rule sets
• example battle report
• randomizer system
  • d6 or RPG-polyhedrals or special custom (ala FFG)
  • few or lots rolled
  • something else like cards or drawn chits
• command/morale systems
• activation system (igougo/alternating/cards/chits/other)
• solo/duel/multi-player
• army list availability and structure
  • prebuilt in main book
  • prebuilt in other books
  • specific lists with little or no choice or customization
  • specific lists with many choices or customized units
  • complete make your own for "my guys"

setting/genre

• specific period/genre
• included setting genre and summary, if not historical
• tie-in support to other media
  • art books
  • video games
  • board games
  • RPG supplements
  • TV/movie/novel licenses

social

• existing community
• social media presence
• forums, mailing lists, web sites, facebook groups, etc
• tournaments and organized play
• convention presence

[fred]

That is one hell of a list -  and I don’t disagree with any of it. But it does make it very hard for the author of a new set of rules to try to cover all of that in a snappy readable format.

[ced1106]

> Is there any chance my gaming mates will be even slightly interested in playing the game?

I think this is an extremely important question -- which is why I've only played campaigns solo during the pandemic.

Boardgamers call it the "Cult of the New". It means that you bring your newest boardgame to the group, they play it once or twice, and it's never played again. This means your ruleset must make a good first impression. It's no longer the old school "play the game a few times to get the strategy" way of playing. Much worse, if the owner doesn't explain the rules well, then your game fails, despite how well you did everything else. And, btw, I usually don't buy games with campaigns that require a regular group if it requires other players, since I'll end up playing the first two scenarios over and over again before whatever gaming group loses interest.

Roleplaying games are even worse. Most of them assume a regular gaming group, so, RPG's have been expensive coffee table books, meant to be read, but in a fancy format (eg. shiny hardcover book that dings easily, and great artwork that has nothing to do with the rules) that's unnecessary, and sometimes detrimental (one book for players and the GM's) for play.

I'm spent less time playing miniature games, but at least the convention is that you usually only need one opponent. I just don't like the unlearning of standard concepts (eg. LOS) from one ruleset to another. I've had enough grail-chasing with dungeoncrawlers, so, with miniature skirmish games, "if it works for me don't fix it" is fine with me. That means I'm fine with this ruleset (Lasting Tales) that has narrative and let me use the fantasy painted miniatures I already have, despite its odd rules on movement, armor, and weapons.

[TheDaR]

That is one hell of a list -  and I don’t disagree with any of it. But it does make it very hard for the author of a new set of rules to try to cover all of that in a snappy readable format.

Yeah.  That said, I don't think you need to, and would go so far as to say shouldn't, cover everything in one post. 
Rather, you pick the ones most important and relevant to the audience you're trying to reach as the "hook", and then  reel them into your other prepared media that covers the rest.  I think the purchasing, physical, and first handful of points of the rules section are probably most important for press-release sort of blurb.  The others can be relegated to blog posts or articles on your website.

[terrement]

That is one hell of a list -  and I don’t disagree with any of it. But it does make it very hard for the author of a new set of rules to try to cover all of that in a snappy readable format.

First, many thanks to The DaR for the sifted and sorted list.

I agree that the author would indeed be hard pressed to do just that.  My thoughts on the subject are below.  They are probably "preaching to the choir" in many instances, but part of my reasons for this whole excursion is to provide some education for an acquaintance who knows publishing but does not know gaming.  They have at least two rule sets they will be trying to publish in the not too distant future.
Additionally, my opinions expressed here isn't an attempt to categorically state "Them thar's the rules, by George!".  I'm just a greybeard in the hobby, grey beard and all, and these are based on my observations.  You may have had completely different experiences.  If so I welcome additional comments.
1.  "The Man Who Would Be King" should be aware of discussions like this and perhaps pick and choose those to be in the initial opening advert.

2.  The single most important thing to do is identify those items above that they see as important in defining their game, and they need to sell all of us on their concept that makes THIS rule set one you absolutely will need to add to your already more than you need pile of rules.  If it's just like a repackaging of other rule sets ideas, it will draw no one.  If they can't sell the idea, nothing else matters.

3.  I think the author needs a media presence - publisher's site, their own website, a dedicated Facebook site or similar.  There is benefit in putting out the initial advert, then in whatever forum, regularly post additional information on the project.  I know a few commercial rule authors who have done this sort of things for years and, well, they've done it for years.  Longevity indicates some degree of continued success.  The repeated presence and updates is important.  You can't just put out one announcement with no follow up information and without even revisiting the sites they posted to reply to questions in the posts.  Those of us who have supported Kickstarters have probably all seen ones where the owner of the project is terrible at posting updates and know the problems that creates among the backers.

4.  It might be beneficial to have a standalone "spec sheet" with many of the items above included, and or a FAQ page linked and to which additional info can be added.  Folks at the publishers site and the authors site(s) all need to have at least most of that info easily accessible so it can be provided verbally, sent as an attachment to an email, or hyperlinked.

5.  There is benefit in SHOWING gamers what their product is, how it works, what is similar to what they know from other games (making it perhaps easier to pick these rules up as well as what makes theirs special, noteworthy, faster, easier, better, less filling, more taste, etc.  Especially if they are new to the publishing and marketing, there are other sources to help with this and spread the word.  Review sites on YouTube that can do a video review.  Maybe a few gamer contacts they know who have a regular gaming group who can play, write up an AAR or two, take pictures.  They can post their own vids as well.  One of the most effective use of tis is by Buck Surdu, the author of Combat Patrol.  He has a number of shorter vids with each explaining and demonstrating an aspect of the rules.  I far prefer this to some of the over an hour presentations some folks do.

6.  With all of this it is also important to let folks know what their game isn't.

7.  Whether done by the publisher, or the author or both, they need to understand there is a need to do these things up front and map out their strategy and schedule for marketing and have their ducks in a row before they make their first announcement.  Playing catch-up, or at least trying to, is a fools errand.

8.  Playtesting is critical.  Yeah, I know YOU know that.  I 've done a fair bit of playtesting / rule analysis for several folks ranging from strangers online who post on a wargeming board that they are looking for playtesters, to assisting Kickstarter projects especially when guys are gamers and have a great concept but really don't know how to write, edit, or playtest.  One of the biggest situation that creates problems for the author(s) is when they lack others external to their regular but insular group, or who are hyper concerned about anyone knowing the rules ahead of time, to those who just don't care.  This results in at least two common types of problems. 

Case 1 is when they've written up the draft and are playing, they find (typically more than one) parts where it made sense when writing it but the situation on the table isn;t what they had in mind.  They discuss it, try the new rule version, still don't like it discuss it some more, try it again, like it better but it still needs tweaking.  They may or may not do the tweaking then, intending to revisit it later.  But which if any of those alternate approaches were documented?  Did they make some notes as to why it needed to be changed and how they fixed it?  Did the final version they decided upon ever make the rule book or was it finally agreed to, played, liked, and accepted but never documented?  Similarly, a situation comes up, problem is identified, and they all decide they'll handle it just like they did in Sam's game, but adapted for this other time period.  They are all familiar with Sam's game, so no further explanation is put into the rules.  Game is released, and all of us who never played Sam's game may read that section and realize it could be interpreted in multiple ways.

Case 2 is a failure to edit for continuity as well as content.  You don't want to have folks doing something in Section Three that hasn't even been addressed and won't be until Section Seven.  Consistency in naming and numbering conventions.  Setting themselves up for problems by doing things by pages instead of section numbering - which gets all bolloxed up as things are added, removed, modified, reorganized and so forth.  "See discussion on page 39" was perfect when the discussion actually was there.  Is it still?

Case 3 is a lack of diagrams and explanations to cov is stated but may not be completely clear.  The more new gamers you are trying to attract, the more of those things should be included where it is necessary.

But at least one set of independent objective eyes not involved in the creation should be included in the project once the rules are at the alpha state.

I know I've seen more than one set of rules where its clear that their finished product wasn't really ready for release.  I'm guessing many of you have as well.

[Robosmith]

If it's not miniature agnostic I want to see the real miniatures, bare plastic/metal (don't like resin) and painted. Not 3D renders or just art work. I know kickstarters love to do that but you never know what you're getting.

[SJWi]

I agree with much of what has been already written but would add two words..... "the truth"!

I have several sets of rules that claimed to be scale agnostic and "no re-basing required" but almost assume certain figures scales or basing conventions. Very annoying.  I also bought a recent set of Napoleonic  rules that per the cover went from 1806 onwards but only had lists  1813 onwards. No doubt we will be asked to buy extra period-specific booklets in due time. I viewed that as "Sharp Practice"....and the rules are not a Lardy Production.

I also appreciate knowing if army lists are available plus on-line support/Q&A etc etc .     

[ChrisBBB]

Nice thread. Prompted me to look up my pre-publication announcement of BBB back in 2014:
http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=363597
I see I had to add a clarification message with small details such as likely price, had to disappoint people who asked about pdf, and answered some Qs about specifics of rule mechanisms etc. But I reckon I give myself a healthy 8 out of 10 against TheDaR's checklist.

[mikedemana]

Maybe this has been beat to death, but can I add this consideration? Does it really HAVE to be a kickstarter? Every third thing I see advertised on the internet for gaming seems to be a kickstarter. Why? Especially with a rules set? Write the dang rules, play test them, and publish them. THEN we'll buy them if they sound interesting. Hell, we even had a kickstarter wargaming convention in our state...! 

I have backed a grand total of one kickstarter, and I have to say I was not overly pleased with the miniatures when they arrived. And that was after seeing painted versions of them online.

That said, I love the list this thread has created. I will definitely keep it in mind when it comes to marketing any of my own rules sets in the future. Well done! 

Mike Demana