In the modern day, board games, table top games, and role playing games, all have issues. This is not fully a failing of the game designers, or the game manufactures, sometimes it is simply that the rules are ambiguous, confusing, contradictory or missing information. Additionally, as games age and hundreds, if not thousands, of the games are played, situations arise that were not foreseen. This is where an official Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document is needed.
The Official FAQ acts as an authoritative clarification supporting the game’s rulebook. It answers reoccurring questions and clarifies ambiguous statements. When combined with an Errata, used to correct printing errors and standardize edge-case interpretations, the FAQ becomes the final word in rule dispute resolution and concept clarification. It moves the rules conversation from a debate, to a supported reference, allowing for consistency across the game and the tables on which it is played.
The Community “Word of Mouth”, is more of an organic rules interpretation process. New players learn form friends, public forums, videos, and sometimes organized play groups. Rather than a single authority interpretation the rules are filtered through social networks and the results may or may not be what was intended. While this is good for getting players into the game, it is not cross compatible when shifting from group to group, or store to store. This social network distribution method is subject to information drift, clarifications are simplified, assumptions slip in, and misinterpretation propagates as the word of mouth progresses. In time significant diversions from the printed rules can occur. Particularly when there are documented examples to support the diversion and none to support the Word of Mouth.
The line between an official FAQ and community Word of Mouth is the same as the line between statute law and customary practice. An official FAQ is documented, citable, and consistently revised to reflect the intent of the rules system as intended by the designer or manufacturer. Word of Mouth is not documented, unsupportable, and open to interpretation, this can be a strength when teaching a new player game concepts prior to teaching the game’s crunchy rules. What starts out as an easy teaching method can easily become a game mechanics mutation that swings wildly into the Homebrew realm of rules.
Homebrew / House Rules rest in the middle of the rules, FAQ, and Word of Mouth systems. As such they are an intentional, table-specific modification to the printed rules. These types of rules are adopted to address real, or perceived, flaws. They may adjust various game conditions, play time, randomness, or difficulty. They can also adjust the game to suit player preferences. Being that they are intentional deviations they are often documented informally. Stored for the ease of accessibility to the specific play group that uses them. Such rules acknowledge that published rules are just starting frameworks for a shared experience and open to adjustment.
Homebrew may improve enjoyment but it complicates across group communications. A player may discover what they believed to be “how the game works”, was actually a local variant. This is common in long-lived mass-market games like Monopoly, Risk, or HeroQuest. Games with not only long historic followings, but with various rules printings and publications. Homebrew in hobby games is often treated as optional and can sometimes be worked in to the official rules by the designers after the community decides their worth.
Without an official FAQ, the burden of interpretation shifts entirely to the community. The immediate result is fragmentation of the player base. With many different online forums, reviewers, and influencers, conflicting answers become the standard fare. Players depend on uniform rulings when they have questions. Without documented official clarification, game organizers must create their own rule documents, effectively becoming the local authorities. This leads to multi-parallel rule standards, where the same game is played very differently across various tables, stores, and regions.
The lack of an official FAQ increases rules friction and new player onboarding difficulty. New players encounter contradictory explanations and have to choose which source is trustworthy. Disputes take longer and interrupt game play. With complex games involving many interacting systems such as, miniature games, campaign dungeon crawlers, or heavy economic simulations, ambiguity compounds over time. Each unresolved issue develops into additional multiple edge case scenarios. This can cause rules fatigue and in the worst cases abandonment of the game altogether.
Documented rules and Community rules operate on different support systems. Documented rules rely on text, diagrams, and formal updates. They are easily referenced through citation: players can point to a page and resolve a dispute. Community rules rely on group norms, expectations, and consensus. They are supported through agreement. Community rules include table etiquette, sportsmanship, turn pacing expectations, and negotiation norms. These aspects are rarely covered in depth in the rulebook but critical to play experience.
A healthy game community integrates all of these systems. Documented rules define mechanics and shared structure. Social rules define acceptable behaviors, courtesy, and adaptability. An official FAQ and Erratta supports the documented layer, while community discussion enriches the social layer. Issues arise when one layer tries to abdicate in favor of the other, when Word of Mouth overrides mechanical clarity, or when rigid textualism ignores the needs of the group. Typically official clarifications settle mechanics while still encouraging table-level customization.
An Official FAQ provides stability and consistency with the rules. Word of Mouth provides accessibility and social interaction. Homebrew provides personalization and evolution. These three systems, when balanced, create a resilient game community. When imbalanced, particularly when official documented clarification is missing, confusion and fragmentation follow. Good game stewardship is an artform, not only in writing rules, but in supporting their interpretation over time as the game develops.
– Dru
Dru's Den of Ill Repute 