News Shop
Events Forums

Unofficial Codex Advanced Rulebook 2.0


#1

rulebook gdoc

I made a revised Codex rulebook as a gdoc.

Rationale:
I found learning the game extremely frustrating with supplied rulebook. Rules read nice, you think you get how it works, then you start playing your first game…
And find out you dont know what happens in absurdly many non trivial cases that arise during first game. Rulings are all over the place. Introduced in order intended for teaching completely new player. Often missing a ton of subtelities and splitting relevant information over multiple sections. Furthermore many less trivial rules on keywords lack detailed enough explanation to be interpreted in one way only. Then you find other ruling resources:

Rulings spreadsheet


Is great as a living ruling database and is organised neatly, but it is fragmented and less then ideal if you dont know rules really well in the first place.

Rules questions thread:


Is great. Good work everyone.
But it is very inconvinient to search and has no real structure apart from pinning most important rulings.

http://codexcarddb.com/
Is also great for card-specyfic rulings. Man i wish LCGs had something similar. But it lacks general framework description.

This rulebook is not intended to replace any of above ruling sources. The aim of the rulebook is to present information from Rulebook, Rulings Spreadsheet and Rules questions thread in a form that makes it easier to learn complete general rules. The thing that currently is IMO much too hard to learn as information is fragmented and not presented in a coherent way. Most of my document is copy paste or rephrase from one of above documents. I do not think that above sources will be redundant even if rulebook works. Ruling thread is still usefull to ask questions, even if they are already answered somewhere. Spreadsheet table is much easier to maintain when adding new rulings. It is also easier to search than full text document. I just want learning above info to be easier.

Any card specyfic rulings are beyond scope of this rulebook and are better off in codexcarddb anyway.

This thread is intended for comments on the initiative. Errors in the document. Or other kinds of sugestions on improving the document.

Document is work in progress, I started making it today morning. (3 XI 2016) It might stilll contain many errors, and miss many stuff so I’d prefere less nitpicking and more genereal info for some time. (unless there arent that many serious errors then nitpicking is highly encouraged)


#2

This is pretty cool! I can see this becoming a great resource for teaching new players. However, you really need an editor. There’s some weird formatting and grammar, and some parts could be made much clearer than they are. Forgive me if I’m wrong, but is English not your native language? Some of the mistakes I saw are similar to the kinds of mistakes I’ve seen my foreign exchange student classmates make when I looked at their writing (like “today morning” instead of “this morning” in your post).

Is it OK if I help you with the writing on this? My mother and sister are editors, and while I’m not as good as they are, I’m still fairly good at fixing people’s writing and I’d love to help! Actually, I’d recommend changing the settings on the document to allow people to make comments – that way anyone can help you, and you can decide whether to accept their changes or not.


#3

I am all for this, but wow is it a lot of work.


#4

Regarding “rulings all over the place,” there should really be only one place. That one place is the rulings spreadsheet, at least in the short term. The card database site pulls from that spreadsheet, but it currently lacks the general page of rulings, and shouldn’t lack that. When that is implemented, the card database page will be a complete front end and the only place people need to look, since it will be basically like the spreadsheet but nicer UI.

A long thread about rulings questions is not a good place to look. It’s fine to exist, but not a place you should normally need to go. If someone would need to, it means the ruling isn’t in the rulings spreadsheet, so it should be added there.

The rulebook of course isn’t intended to be a 100% complete rules lawyer description of everything. It needs to be quite opposite of that, instead designed to tell people who the game basically works in friendly way to normal people. MtG’s rulebooks are exactly the same way (friendly at giving a general explanation, not a complete rules description), work well, and are fairly similar to Codex’s. MtG has a SEPARATE document intended to be complete rules, which is absurdly long and not something normal people should read when attempting to learn the game.

Instead of such a document, Codex has a ruling spreadsheet that answers basically anything you’d want to know. It’s that way on purpose, and if you want to know something that isn’t in there, it should be added. There could ALSO be a comprehensive rules document. It’s not that having such a thing is bad, it’s more that the rulings spreadsheet already pretty much does the job anyway, so it’s low value to create such a new document. That said, @sharpobject, the rules manager for the game, was considering creating one anyway. That would be great, but I think he got sidetracked on other things. Perhaps the OP’s document is intended to be that same document.

As @Hobusu said, the OP’s document needs a lot of copy editing. For example, the first sentence says “Starting player places his worker 4x side.” Should be something like “The player going first starts with four workers, denoted by putting the “x4” side of their worker card face up in their worker zone.”


Rules Questions thread
#5

I used too strong phrasing of my experience with the rulebook by saying “all over the place”. Speaks more about my experience than quality of rulebook that’s objectively quite ok compared to other card and board games.
I set my hopes too high regarding learning the game experience quality.
I found searching through the rulebook really frustrating. Dramaticaly affecting my first games experience.
One of the reasons is the complexity of the game, and the other reason is that rulebook is structured in a way that is not friendly for someone wanting to find a ruling for the situation he encounters in the game, especilay when you are learning the game and you don’t even know what you don’t know.

I always felt this frustration in many complex games. Codex isn’t particularly worse in this regard. I just feel it can be avoided with right rulings summary. Codex happened to hit the scope where it feels just perfect for me to try doing it.
It’s complex enough, so this kind of rulebook makes sense. But at the same time isn’t absudly complex and time eating like most TCG/LCG games. So i decided to spend some time and give it a try.

If general spreadsheet page, missing rules from rules thread and rules from basic Rulebook are added to the cardbase my work here will become redundant. If it doesnt happen and before it happens I feel it is valuable. The whole point is to make searching for rulings in a given game situation by moderately experienced player as simple as possible and as little time consuming as possible.

Real life example:
I dont know wheather Exhausting indestructable unit as a result of damaging it sidelines it from patrol zone.
Well they should right? But there is “Moment’s Peace” so changing game and requiring different approach might be what indestructable patroller is all about. idk

Its a basic interaction. How to find it currently:

  • going through rulebook: reading indestructable section, hmm it says exhaust…
    page 19 - it doesnt say anything about sidelining
  • ok maybe in attacking section where was it… oh there is something on page 5 combat patrol attacking…
    Exhausted units or heroes can’t patrol (so you can’t usually attack with something and patrol with it that same turn).
    hmm does it apply to indestructable being exhausted, or only assigning patrollers? idk
    damn cant find anything more specyfic, looking through whole rulebook finding nothing
    spend like 20 min searching, frustration raising

ok lets search spreadsheet
3 rulings, nothing about this case, but at least it was fast and i learned 3 new cases

now rules thread
OMG 600 posts, search for indestructable, found 1 post, some other ruling
hmm maybe i need to formulate this diferently… idk…

I just want to play the game, and this ruling makes too much of an impact to just randomly assume something.

Playtesting this kind of game is too important to waste on absurd ruling problems.

And one place needs to have all rulings. Including core rulebook rules and advanced cases. Otherwise it is a real pain to search for rules you missed. Especialy when base rulebooks isn’t really designed for finding rulings.

So i disagree with current resources being enough. (Codex is really good compared to some other games, but i still think you can do so much better. Card database with rulings really shows you care, i just think basic rules framework needs better resources for both new and advanced players) Future resources might be enough.

It is easy to dimiss the need for easy to learn and precise rules when playing in engaged community, especilay when some members are in touch with designer. The group will eventually get all the rules right, or at least right enough so everyone is fine with them.

But having acessible to learn rules is super important for serious players, who want to play as designed, but don’t have access to other ruling sources than provided by the game and internet.
It happens very often with players who don’t go to tournaments, but like to play more complex competitive games with their fast learning friends who also like deep games.
This also matters for all Johny type players who like to find edge uses of cards, but hate quarreling about certain rules during actual play. (comunities often explore more standard interactions, but might find it hard to agree on rullings when less seen Johny cards start interacting)

Codex is much better than LCGs I play, and things will only improve as the time progresses. Game is finite and less obvious ruling areas will keep being collected and hopefully presented in user friendly fasion in the future.

Going back to the document i linked. I know its not perfect. English is not my natie language, mostly i read it on the internet and in games. I dont write much. And by trade im programmer not writer. I also tend to write chaotically editing many times until my text starts making sense. Even in my native language. So i expect it to need more work.

I make this doc mostly for myself. But I thought someone might find it usefull. And someone might find it a good idea to help me improve it.
The most important for me are rules I understood and as a consequence written wrongly.
Sentences that have irritating technical or styliistical misstakes are of less concern to me, but i will fix them if the fix doesn’t take too much time.

I’ll add an option to comment to ease improving this version. Soundls like a good idea.
I do want to enforce what I find good for the docuent, so i’ll probably reject some sugestions I disagree with or find too hard to fix not breaking something else in the process (like clarity, structure of given part etc).
But I’ll gladly fix many mistakes, especialy small stupid mistakes.

I dont think i’ll add opion to edit.
If you like the idea but want to edit it heavily feel free to copy whole document and post improved versions, if you feel like it.
(If there is some problem with copying in current form i can convert it to some other format if it doesnt take too much time. I think ctrl+c works ok in google docs)


Rules Questions thread
#6

This.

A million times this.

…Save that it always comes out as a screed of make-a-sailor-blush profanity when I try to express it…


#7

I just finished adding spreadsheet rulings.
Some other edits also approved/added by me.
If you find something that does not match some better rule source please edit-suggest or post here.
Having ruling source would also be nice, so I can verify rules correctness, even if i don’t know it.
(short link-like form e.g. “Rulebook page 10.” or “Ruling thread post 46.” preferred )