The kids are growing up

[Joff]

Another update:
The Kids are Growing Up 0.4

[Novelty]

Here are my comments...

Formatting: The preparation title is hanging on page 1 while the text is on page 2.  It looks weird.

Formatting: "Each child must be deployed to separate tiles only one child can be deployed per turn."  I think those are two sentences in there that has been joined into one.

Formatting: Page 2 doesn't have the blue box, page 3 has 2 blue boxes.

Formatting: Page 4 looks weird

Formatting: 'child' or child is not used consistantly throughout the document.  Likewise with 'parent' and parent.

Comment: I like the 1 point for 1 and 3 points for both in the new scoring area.

Formatting: The Header is missing a number of capital letters in the title (The Kids are growing up)

Comment: Footnote 8 should also include the phrase: "All reference to "road or city" in the rules would therefore also include forests and/or rivers if playing with the relevant fan-made expansions." or something to that effect.

Keep up the good work Joff.  It's coming along nicely

[wicke]

Some comments, but the ones already mentioned by Novelty is left out:

footnote 3, ends with just "However" in a new sentence that doesn't end

The Preparation section need a blank line (or two) at the end

side 3 last line, "normal regular follower" sounds strange

Otherwise it sounds OK, although I believe it might be quite difficult to read through now since it is much longer than the original rules, but some might think it is necessary to avoid misinterpretations.

[Joff]

Almost good to go: The Kids are Growing Up 0.5

[Novelty]

It's coming along nicely.  Just one comment:

"a city made up of 6 tiles" sounds weird to me.  "a city which consists of 6 tiles" is better but I'm sure there are better alternatives.

[Joff]

'a completed city that is spread over 6 tiles'

'a completed city that comprises 6 tiles'

'a single completed city comprising 6 tiles'

'a single completed city made up of 6 tiles'

'a single completed city over 6 tiles'

'a completed city which consists of 6 tiles'

'a completed city consisting of 6 tiles'

one of these perhaps?

[Novelty]

'a completed city consisting of 6 tiles'

I like this one best out of all the ones in the list

[Lardarse]

"a city that has 6 tiles"

[Scott]

'a completed city consisting of 6 tiles'

I like this one best out of all the ones in the list

Ditto.

[Joff]

Getting there: The Kids are Growing Up 0.6

All that has changed is the offending sentences regarding the 6 tile city. If there are no further comments, I will release the final version late this evening (UK time) or tomorrow morning. I hope this meets your approval wicke.

[wicke]

You know I approve of your time and effort spent on this,
but it is still difficult to read the rules of my simple expansion,
and to see how long and seemingly difficult it has become.

Some small comments (just thought they should be corrected before a final version):
footnote 1, second sentence should begin with a capital letter

there seem to be enough space on side 1 for the Preparation section

Second paragraph in The kids are growing up, third sentence seem to have
two blank spaces between the words been and involved

Thanks Joff
.../Wicke

[Joff]

You know I approve of your time and effort spent on this,
but it is still difficult to read the rules of my simple expansion,
and to see how long and seemingly difficult it has become.

I disagree with you. The problem with simple rules is they leave a lot of ambiguities, which makes the expansion unplayable to others (who will have unanswered questions). One must attempt to address all possible difficulties associated with any fan-made expansion, especially when you are playing Carcassonne which might be played with a number of different expansions. It is not as clear cut as you might think. The very fact that we have a list of FAQ's for HiG to answer, testifies that there are points that are unclear in the official rules. Here is an example of such (from the HiG thread):

For example:

7: According to FAQ 170 there are some 'distractions' on this part of CAR. So I think this rule should read 'Mayor can only be deployed to a city where there are no knights, mayors and wagons'. I know this not mentioned in the rules, but I think it should because otherwise it wouldn't be logical to deploy a mayor where there is a wagon!...

This is an opinion based on a FAQ regarding deployment of the Wagon. The point is here that the rules make it absolutely clear that a Mayor cannot be deployed to a city which contains a Knight. There is no mention of a Wagon, and the rules do not point out that Wagons can be deployed as Knights. They are deployed solely as Wagons. This would mean, in a game, if a player deploys a Mayor into a city where I have my Wagon, I would not be able to prevent it and have no argument when it comes to adjudication by the rules. This is why we need HiG to actually answer the question so it becomes part of the rules.

The above is a clear cut problem regarding the official rules. Now, we all 'know' that a Mayor cannot be deployed to a city containing a Wagon, but the rules do NOT say that, and I have no argument to someone who insists that the Mayor can be deployed with my Wagon!

I can play In the Stocks exceptionally well. The rules for it are terribly long winded though. But needs must. I have the advantage in that I created that expansion, so I, naturally, 'know' all the rules. Things that I think are pretty obvious, in reality, aren't that obvious. It is the same for your expansions, you already 'know' the rules. I don't. If I were to play Kids, (and I have purchased the meeples especially so I can play it), using the original rules it would be unplayable by me (unless you were overseeing the game).

If the rules are not what you envisioned, you are welcome to work on them. I will be happy to pdf them for you and host them. The reason I have worked on them is because I requested that I could finish off Kids, Valois and Pope for you (in your abscence). I certainly don't want to 'tread on your toes' regarding your expansions.

Edit: wicke's corrections - The Kids are Growing Up 0.7

[wicke]

Again, I didn't mean any disrespect to you Joff, that's not the problem.
When you see what kinds of questions are popping up for the original Carc game, you understand that people don't have the patience to read through the complete rules (not even the official ones, let alone the 120 page CAR).
That's why people won't have the patience reading through complex fan-made expansion rules either and that would be sad if they get the impression that it's too complex, when in reality they can be rather simple.

For example, I have translated the rules for all original expansions and the fan-made expansions I like, to swedish, and at the same time, shortened them and just written down the main themes and rules.
The complete document that includes rules for Catapult, Shrines, Siege, The Jester & The Minstrel, Invasion of Catharism, Trading Post, Tax Collector, Prison, Cleric & Serf, Kids are growing up, The Pope of Avignon, The House of Valois, The Leper, Bishop & Dioceses, The Giant, The Medieval Expansion, Archery Tournament, Wizard of Oz, Lord of the Manor, Gold Mines, Outposts, The Noblemen, Treasure Hunt, Family Feud, Fishermen, Forests and The Volcano Erupts became just 7 pages long.

.../Wicke

[Joff]

I want my expansions to be available to as many people as possible and so I like them to be hosted at CC. I also believe that the expansions hosted at CC are definately the best of the fan-mades out there. It is actually our rules that set them in a class of their own (even comparable to official expansions in some cases). I see your point about people not having the patience to read through the rules, but that is their problem and not mine. My job is to issue a rule set that will cover as many situations that can be thought of, before I release to the public.

I guarantee that all have had to turn to the rules to seek a clarification at some point. If rules were simplistic where would you go to get that clarification? For an answer you would post a question at a forum, or ask the creator of that expansion direct.

However, I do not have the time necessary to oversee answering questions that might be raised as a result of my rules being too simplistic. Most of the intricate questions, however, are raised in the footnotes so they do not detract from the main thrust of the expansion itself. If you cut out the footnotes the rules, in most cases, become straightforward 'simple' expansions (especially if you cut out the examples also (I could not even contemplate the problems that cutting the examples out would cause though). Cutting out the footnotes, causes the problem of having to answer every request for a rules clarification. A quick look at BGG shows that for Carcassonne (for those not using the CAR, at least), the same questions are asked over and over again, each time having to be answered once again. Another difficulty is that expansions created by me (and others) are being released to the public without prior knowledge as to which official expansions they will be used together with, and so, again, you have to foresee different situations that may arise for different people.

[Joff]

Here is the final release:

The Kids are Growing Up