New rules pdf

[original_login]

I've been working on merging Matt's translation of the rules with the German rules .pdf found on the Hans im Glueck website. The new .pdf has the layout and high quality graphics of the German rules .pdf, yet with the English translation. I've completed the first four pages. I am seeking to have it approved.

My goal was to make a professional-looking rules .pdf with the original look of the German rules so that people could print a copy for themselves that has those qualities.

Because many people (and myself) do not own the big box edition, and because it is no longer sold, I have used the original rules rather than the big box rules in this .pdf I've made. If you think I shouldn't do this this way, please let me know and tell me why. I might make two copies: one .pdf with the big box rules and one original.

I also haven't included the FAQ. Although I like the FAQ, I think it should remain separate. Maybe I'll make a .pdf with the FAQ and German rules layout.

[original_login]

I've completed the .pdf. I am still seeking to have it approved.

[original_login]

Because many people (and myself) do not own the big box edition, and because it is no longer sold, I have used the original rules rather than the big box rules in this .pdf I've made. If you think I shouldn't do this this way, please let me know and tell me why. I might make two copies: one .pdf with the big box rules and one original.

Change of plan: because it appears that the current German rules use the "Big Box rules," I plan to use exactly the same rules Matt used in his translation, yet I would still like to keep the basic rules and expansion rules separate.

[mjharper]

Hi, thanks for getting involved. But this really should have been a suggestion under the usual thread.

To be honest, I'm not completely sure what the point of the exercise is. The current version of the CAR is in draft form, and the small version being linked to on the thread above is the low quality version. I checked the rules available on the HiG site, and they're the standard version, with no new graphics or anything. So if the graphics seem low quality in the CAR 5.0 draft, it's because I wanted to post a small version for everybody to get an idea of the new layout. The higher quality version was always planned, and I can upload it in a flash. I've just been extremely busy recently, and 5.0 hasn't made it out of beta just yet. If you want a copy, just let me know.

The Big Box rules, as you mention in the third post, are quite simply the latest version of the rules which we have available. I'm sure that there will be a reprint at some point, but even so, the aim of the CAR—and this site—is to encourage use of the most up-to-date rules, while taking account of the alternatives. That in itself leads to the need for annotation—after all, the original CAR was nothing but a translation of the Big Box rules with notes about the changes they brought about. While I appreciate that there are rather a lot of annotations and FAQ included, just omitting them would seem to cause more problems than anything else. There are enough heated debates between HiG and RGG players that a comprehensive rule-set is useful just because it is comprehensive. Not using the Big Box rules and/or omitting the FAQ would undermine any claims to legitimacy which the CAR has.

The current situation with 5.0 was in fact to just have a single document; but every version until that—including all the material available in the downloads section—was divided up into smaller documents according to expansion. So if you only play vanilla Carc, you need only download the rules for the basic game alone. That's already the case here on CC, and also in the copies posted on BGG. The idea behind releasing a single file was to reduce time spent editing, but if the community would like to keep the complete and individual versions, I'm more than happy to work something out.

I'm also somewhat apprehensive about my translations being used in another document, actually. I have nowhere said that the translations are 'open source'—maybe I should make it clearer that they are not—but, given that the CAR is/should be in a constant state of development, I'm loath to sanction a different edition which will inevitably fall behind and corrections and improvements which are made. Of course, I'm open to suggestions for allowing collaboration on the document—that was the whole point of the discussion about moving to Google Docs—but still, I think the community would be served best by a single, definitive edition. Whether I am sole creator or just assume the role of Editor is fine by me. But—and I don't wish this to come across as egotistical—I do wish to retain the final say, quite simply because I have already invested a great deal of time in the CAR, the FAQ, and the associated websites.

So by all means, let people see your suggestions, and I'm sure we can look into integrating improvements into the CAR. But I really don't want to have an alternate version of my translations in circulation.

[Bixby]

My personal thoughts come from my professional experience. Version control is a nightmare with multiple simultaneous efforts. I am a very big fan of a single safe source document. I appreciate the effort done on CAR thus far and throw my vote to have all efforts focused on one project / one document.

My two sense.

[original_login]

Thanks for explaining this, mjharper. This has helped me so much in understanding the documentation project. In case you were wondering, I have not given the .pdf I made to anyone, and will not without your permission. I would like to print myself my own copy, but I'll wait 'till you get back to me on this.

In light of your post, I'll do some more reading on what has already been discussed on the documentation project. I would be grateful if you could send me some links to stuff I should read.

I will still try to pursue my ideas because I think I can modify them to match your criteria.

Thanks again.

P.S.
I do (now) agree with using the big box rules, now that I understand more about them.