What I mean to ask is if, when you approach a game book, is it the setting that catches your interest or is it system first?

For me it is entirely setting. I live all things Star Trek. I own Lug Trek, Decipher Trek and SFB. The systems do not even matter to me so much as the take on the setting.

That said, whether or not I PLAY those games usually is dependant on system (to an extent). If it is worth it, I will convert to a system I like or edit the one that ocmes with it to my tastes but it will most likely go on the shelf or be given to a friend.

So, for you, do you walk up to the shelf and say "Oh, I love x! I must have that setting!" or is it "Give me System X or death!"?

Bill

Setting, most definitely, Bill! I wanted Roma Imperious before I knew a thing about the Iridium system. That was just a nice bonus.

-clash

Setting can intrigue me initially, but system had damn well better appeal to me fast for me to be willing to pursue a game.

RPGPundit

Setting, unless we're talking about a non-specific rules system.

Setting always, which is why I dont care for setting-less systems

For me both things go intertwined.

I'm a setting guy too. I already have a buttload of systems, so if anything, I feel comfortable breaking out the shoehorn.

Maybe not setting, but subject matter. I like Faery's Tale because it's about Fey. The setting didn't sell the book, but I was pleased to learn from the guy pitching it that Brightwood Forest is undefined, and you get to make up the details. I was sold on Low Life by the art and the idea of it, but not so much the setting (which I didn't get to really read about until I had the book).

Usually I look at systems with a jaundiced eye to see if it's going to be annoying or not. Anything d20, Savage Worlds, or similar is generally ok. Anything that has dice pools, invasive personality mechanics and 'rules for roleplaying' generally has a strike against it, but sometimes that can be overcome (Faery's Tale has dice pools, and I got over my prejudice for that).

Finally- author recognition: if it's an author I like or hate, that factors in.

System.

I'd much rather play with a system I liked in a setting I didn't than the reverse.

Author recognition is also a factor, by the way.

I'd say it's an intersection of the two. Settings that don't interest me (e.g., mecha) are not going to draw me regardless of the system. Similarly, a genre style that I like with a system that fails to impress is also likely a no-go.

I'm not big on licensed settings. Even if I like the licensed setting, experience has shown that the licensed game will as likely as not do nothing for me.

Setting.  It's always about the place I want my players to play (and that I want to play).

Quote from: RPGPunditSetting can intrigue me initially, but system had damn well better appeal to me fast for me to be willing to pursue a game.

RPGPundit

Quite.

Setting gets me in the door, system keeps me in the room...

Quote from: rcsampleSetting gets me in the door, system keeps me in the room...

I agree.

Usually I have this "I'll play anything!" mindset.  Then I run into something like Jeremiah or Wraethu and the setting kills any interest I might have in the game, regardless of any elegance in the system.