by rcjames14
looleypalooley wrote:
Let confusion reign! :p
Quite right! The ambiguity associated with the term "rank" seems to complicate both the reading of the rules and the attempt to write clarifications for the reading of the rules. In this case, we had to use some term to refer to the ordered hierarchy of the clans (from best to worst) and rank seemed to be the most appropriate. If we had used "number" that could have referred to one of two different numbers on each card, so we chose the term "rank".
However, the numbers frequently used on ranking systems usually invert the common correlation between higher number and more/better thing. It seems to me that this phenomenon is due to a cognitive shorthand where the number 1 is used to abbreviate the term "First", the number 2 is used for "Second" and so on. Though... technically, that's semiotic cheating. 1 /= First. 1st = First.
Nevertheless, the prevalence of this type of association between numbers and rankings means that our effort to use terminology to help clarify the rules probably ended up being worse than the cure. It seems quite reasonable to me that people might interpret 1 as the 'highest', aka. 'best' rank. Especially in light of the fact that it might counter balance the effect of very high strength cards.
As long as everyone agrees to a common set of rules for assigning the order of numbers into a ranking system at the beginning (higher number = better vs. lower number = better), then it seems like either method would work. In the meantime, we will work on being better at choosing our words.
Does anyone have suggestions for an alternative name for that card property that would be less confusing?
k0w0k wrote:
I sent the designer, Richard James, a question and this was his response:
Thanks, k0w0k, for passing along the answer.