During one of the many player discussions around the transparency of the rules, I remember a staff member saying something along the lines of:
“What? You want us to write down everything the rules cover? That’s ridiculous.”
At the time, I genuinely struggled to understand that logic.
For the past five years, I’ve worked as a community manager in a government funded sector where good governance is essential. If our governance falls below the required standard, we risk losing our funding. We also rely on membership income, meaning that if our members lose confidence in the organisation, that has a direct financial impact.
Our organisation regularly introduces new structures and mechanisms, while also having to adapt to external changes. We have a yearly handbook update, and where necessary, new rules are implemented immediately throughout the year.
Yes, the handbook is hefty.
But does it make my staff job easier? Absolutely.
I very rarely come across a situation that isn’t covered by the rules. And when something genuinely new does arise, we refer it to the appropriate people, who can then decide whether the handbook needs to be updated.
I think there is an opportunity for Torn to take a similar approach.
The Problem
There are several issues that seem to repeatedly arise around the current rules:
- Players feel that the rules, and the intricacies surrounding them, aren't transparent enough.
- Staff often have to refer players to an answer that was previously given to a small group of members, buried in an obscure forum thread, or discussed somewhere else within the game.
- Staff have to repeatedly answer the same questions in different places.
- Players can invest years of time and significant amounts of money into the game, only to discover that something they were doing was considered against the rules because of an interpretation or offshoot of a rule that had never been clearly documented.
- There can be reluctance from staff to give definitive answers on rules, or potentially a lack of clarity or consistency around the rules themselves.
None of these problems are particularly good for either players or staff.
The Solution: A Player Handbook
I would propose creating a Player Handbook containing the rules in their entirety, including the interpretations and clarifications that have developed over time.
The principle would be simple:
If Torn considers something to be against the rules, it should be written down.
For example:
Staff determine that a particular offshoot of an existing rule isn't permitted → add the clarification to the handbook.
The community discovers a new and unusual way of bending or exploiting an existing rule → if Torn decides it isn't acceptable, add it to the handbook.
A recurring situation generates confusion → clarify it in the handbook.
This doesn't necessarily mean making the existing Rules section unnecessarily complicated.
The current Rules section can remain succinct and accessible. Players who want to follow the basic rules can continue doing exactly that. This accommodates players who simply aren't interested in reading a lengthy handbook, or who play the game in a fairly standard way and don't need that level of detail.
The handbook would instead be there for players who want or need more certainty.
Want to understand the rules in more detail? Check the handbook.
Have you come up with some weird and wonderful way of playing the game and want to know whether it is permitted? Check the handbook.
If it isn't covered, discuss it with staff.
And if staff decide that the behaviour isn't permitted, add it to the handbook.
That creates a clear and accessible source of truth for everyone.
Keeping the Handbook Up to Date
I think updates could potentially be handled in two ways.
Immediate Clarifications
If Torn considers something to be obviously against the rules, or wants a change to take effect immediately, it could be announced in the same way as other game updates:
Rule X — Section Y updated.
These changes could potentially be included alongside the relevant patch notes or announcements.
This makes it clear that the change is immediate and prevents players from being caught out by something that wasn't previously documented.
Regular Handbook Updates
For changes that aren't urgent, Torn could maintain a regular handbook update schedule — perhaps every three, six or twelve months.
This would give Torn time to:
- See how new mechanics and player behaviours develop.
- Gather community feedback.
- Determine whether something genuinely needs to be restricted.
- Consolidate smaller clarifications into a single update.
It also gives players a predictable point at which to review changes.
Let the Community Help Build It
One of the things I think makes Torn's community particularly valuable is the sheer amount of time, creativity and critical thinking players put into the game.
Players actively look for ways to optimise, experiment and succeed. They find interactions that developers may never have anticipated.
Sometimes, those discoveries are fantastic.
They create entirely new strategies and playstyles, and Torn can simply say:
“That's clever. It's allowed.”
Other times, players discover something that goes against the intended ethos of the game, creates an unfair advantage, or simply isn't something Torn wants to permit.
In those cases:
“That's not allowed. Let's add it to the handbook.”
That distinction is important.
The community shouldn't necessarily be discouraged from finding these things. In fact, that experimentation is part of what makes a game like Torn interesting.
But once Torn decides where the line is, that line should be documented.
A Work in Progress
I wouldn't expect Torn to produce a perfect handbook overnight.
In fact, I think it would be better to treat the first year as a work in progress.
The community could help identify areas that need clarification, highlight recurring questions and point out inconsistencies. Torn could then gradually build the handbook into a comprehensive reference.
Over time, it becomes a living document:
New situation → staff decision → documented clarification → handbook update.
That would ultimately benefit everyone.
Players get greater transparency and certainty about what they can and cannot do.
Staff get a single, authoritative reference that they can point players towards instead of repeatedly answering the same questions or searching for an old post somewhere.
And Torn gets a clearer, more consistent framework for communicating how its rules are actually intended to work.
Most importantly, players should be able to invest years of their time into the game without discovering that the way they've been playing has suddenly become unacceptable because of a rule interpretation that was never clearly documented.
Players can be given a "tut tut, that isn't nice, don't do it again, we have now added it to the handbook" but Torn could also obviously withhold the right to ban someone for a ridiculous rule break, though not written down, the majority of players would agree with.
It would give players a clearer understanding of where the boundaries actually are — so they can spend their time finding creative ways to play within them.
Will this stop every single issue within this area? Probably not. Will it decrease these issues significantly? I believe it would.