I'm a professional technical writer, and I'm curious about your thoughts on the X-wing core rulebook.

In my opinion, the core rulebook is very well written. It is clear, precise, and visually pleasing. There are ample diagrams to illustrate points in the accompanying text. I also find the examples to be helpful.

As modern rules go, I'd say it's written in a manner that is very easy for an experienced wargamer to pick up. Thorough without being overly dense.

The use of symbols, diagrams and consistent terminology helps a lot here (a lot of modern rules seem to tend to a more 'chatty' style where synonymous (in the sense of similar) terms are often used rather than consistent phrasing, and the different wording then leads to unintended confusion.

The rulebook is very well done for explaining the basics of the game so that someone who has never played can quickly understand the game and be able to handle most potential situations. The rulebook is rather inadequate as a comprehensive rules document, as it has traded completeness and rigor for accessibility.

Clearly written and easy for even a novice gamer. The only trouble I have seen is some players reading too much into something and interpreting the rules. It is akin to arguing teh definition of "is" or attending a tournament of a certain sci0fi based game from a company that resides in the UK. They who must not be spoken.

Beer & Pretzel rules.

The rulebook does a very good job of laying out the happy path. But it fails rather badly when it comes to providing a framework for the depth and variety of abilities which will follow from a game with CCG-style abilities.

Good for an intro game. Very bad as a comprehensive rules set for a growing competitive game.

The "beer and pretzels" argument simply doesn't hold up if you look at the rulings that have actually come out. Many of the rulings depend on very fine definitions of timing or terminology, or specific wording that may defy surface understanding. For instance, the difference between acquiring a target lock and taking the acquire a target lock action, or the timing underlying the R2-D2/obstacle/proximity mine rulings.

X-wing can be played as a beer and pretzels game - but that's not what the rules are.

It is a really easy read and the mechanic is demonstrated very well.

I feel the only part that is missing was some of the terms are a little light ("may" for example) when the FAQ came out and more or less demonstrated against this less frienly approach. Not that its a problem, some greater clarity could have been put into effect in one or two areas, but this could easily be addressed if there is a second edition.

The rulebook was written for a game that was meant to be easy to pick up an play and in wave 1 that was true.

Now with wave 3, you just have to look at how wave 2 created so many rulings in the FAQ (39 of them and doubling the FAQ in size) to see that the rules weren't set up structurally enough to start. It's like Buhallin said, they wrote a board-game rulebook, but are using word specific CCG style system and that is causing problems later on in new releases in understanding how the cards are to work within the rules.

I can see a whole mess of new rulings when wave 3 comes out.

The rulebook does a very good job of laying out the happy path. But it fails rather badly when it comes to providing a framework for the depth and variety of abilities which will follow from a game with CCG-style abilities.

Good for an intro game. Very bad as a comprehensive rules set for a growing competitive game.

Agreed.

They wrote the rulebook b/c they knew that lots of soft-core gamers (lol) would pick up the core set just b/c its Star Wars. (and thus the push into Target and B&N) But it doesn't hold up to the competitive gameplay that comes w/the hard-core crowd. And that's who will keep the game alive via multiple/return purchases.

Considering it is an FFG rulebook I was surprised had how well this was written.