Sanity Test for Build-a-Cult

Mostly follows the expected structure. Consider easing your players into the game by starting with the introduction and objective.

Not listed.

The introduction describes your thoughts about the game, but that obscures what the player is doing. Try moving the mechanical discussion of engine building into the overview and focusing on what the player's experience of the game will be.

This should be a separate section that defines the basic form of play and the objective. Briefly, what do you do and how do you win?

Clearly named and numbered.

Good pictures show what everything looks like. Extensive card anatomy.

The setup steps are clear and easy to follow. Consider

Setup is clearly depicted.

The phases are clearly described. It would be helpful to have an introductory section explaining the flow of the game -- the summary of phases is a good start but it needs more context.

Plenty of diagrams showing how the systems work.

End game procedure is clearly explained. It would be helpful to have a detailed example of scoring.

Anyone who has played Wingspan will quickly grasp these rules. Players who have not played Wingspan (there are a few!) will need a little more introduction at the start of gameplay to get them into the flow of the game.

The overall flow of sentences is good, but there are numerous small grammatical errors such as missing articles ("place an Action Cube", not "place Action cube"), inconsistent punctuation, and typos ("each Player with use"). Also, you can simplify most rules by putting them in the present tense ("The player draws" instead of "The player will draw").

The layout is colorful and most sections are well-grouped. There are sections such as the list of setup steps where you are trying to fit too much text into one page. The small text and tight spacing makes these sections harder to read.

The ad is dark and hard to read. The summary line highlights the game's appeal. The bullet points are good, but I'm not sure the implied comparisons with Wingspan will work in your favor sales-wise.

Strong image, though the title's interaction with the logo is a problem at some sizes.

Does not work well with the background. Doubling the title is redundant. This might be a good place for a publisher logo instead.

Most of the table shots are well-framed and lit -- you can drop the one or two that aren't. This could use an "all the components attractively laid-out and photographed with the box" picture and an "look at all these attractive people having the time of their lives with this game" picture.

Solid thematic description, though watch out for typos ("divine", not "devine"). You're using a good engine, and so summarizing the gameplay might increase the game's appeal. The couple of pictures aren't doing anything for the description -- consider a couple of visual examples of play instead.

No video.