For example, if I flick through a system book and the combat section hasn't got decent rules for multiple opponents (Riddle of Steel, anyone) or fighting with 2 weapons I know it's going to be a bit lame and that I may as well play The Pool (*ducks*).

Is there one rule that you always look for ?

For a fantasy RPG, I look at character definition, character advancement, combat, social interactions and magic.  I'm not particularily interested in a heavy class based approach, there are a variety of D&D editions for that, nor do I particualrily care for systems that give you points for disadvantages (due to the abuse I've seen of such system).  I generally prefer skill based systems... which leads to looking at character advancement, not too hard, not too much the one trick pony, want a large dynamic range of smoothly progressing power.

On combat, not looking for a heavy tactical game with minature defined facing, but would like to see some abstract consideration of such (bonus for flanking, bonus and penalty for charging etc.).  I like skill based differentials determining melee chances of success and armor that reduces damage.

Social interactions, would like to see that the system at least supports some random element and task like approach to such things when important.

Magic, can be very picky here.  Seen many systems with wonderful ideas but little meat that become bears to actually play or run.  I generally compare the damaging spells to a sword thrust to get an idea of how high powered they are.  I've no problem dropping spells outright but don't care for a magic system where the natural game-world consequences would be magic as technology, e.g., lots of permanent spells, where its more cost effective to cast a spell for food than to farm, etc.

But heck, I'll pick up almost any game if it has a few good ideas or has a lot of art I like.  There is so much I had to pass on being a poor kid that I don't deny myself now.

Car chases and seductions.  

...

...no, actually, I look to see how basic task resolution works.

VROOM-VROOM, KISS-KISS!

I'd second the Doc, but we all do that all the time. Its in the forum charter. No, seriously, look it up.

Hrmm...other than that...

I do tend to look at advancement type. You know, is it level and class based. Then I try to look at the general mechanics, get a feel for it.  If its too heavy I tend to pass it by (Rolemaster, i would have totally skipped you had I been older and wiser.  Ditto GURPS ). If it's too light, I tend to pass it by. (no examples, I've skipped them all....no, I've got one, but I forget the name. I bought it 'cause the drawings of the signature girl character totally had her panties showing...:haw: )

Seriously: At this point in the 'game' if I can't look at the book and in five/ten minutes tell you how to play it, I put it back. That's it.  I've seen stuff that looked awesome on toast, but I saw how messy the general rules were and left them be. So far, I've been proven right in every case, not a one has so much as raised it's hand in the public conciousness as far as I can see.   After that its a mere matter of weeding out preferences.

Quote from: SpikeI'd second the Doc, but we all do that all the time. Its in the forum charter. No, seriously, look it up.

                Brian: You are all individuals!
    Crowd: YES, YES, WE ARE ALL INDIVIDUALS!
    Brian: You are all different!
    Crowd: YES, WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT!
    Lone Voice: I'm not.
    Person next to him: SHH!  

I look and see if another game I have can already do what the RPG is offering.  For instance, if I wanted to run a fantasy campaign, I would probably D&D since most people know it.   However, if someone can offer an alternative which doesn't remind of D&D or seems duplicable, then I might buy it.  It would have to offer a great setting/great alternative view of the universe.

In fact, I would thumb through the setting first and then look at the rules and see if they seem playable.  I don't have any favorite bits but I do look at overall playability.

Task resolution.

Call me silly but I look for the character generation and character sheet. If I cannot grok the game from that, forget it. Thus, the design of all may games.

Bill

Resolution  - task or otherwise - on various continua: Unification, Complexity, Granularity, etc.

Quote from: HinterWeltCall me silly but I look for the character generation and character sheet. If I cannot grok the game from that, forget it. Thus, the design of all may games.

Bill

Yeah, I look for the character sheet, too.

I look for character creation since knowing how that works is the first thing I need to know to usually understand how things will play out.

I quickly skim task resoloution then move on to character creation then combat.

That's usually enough for a solid first impression.

I'll agree with task resolution as well...but if the Character Sheet has more than 9 Attributes, I won't even consider reading the game.  Nothing irks me more than  a game where the designer feels that including every Attribute that has ever been used in the history of role-playing is somehow revolutionary.

Quote from: HinterWeltCall me silly but I look for the character generation and character sheet. If I cannot grok the game from that, forget it. Thus, the design of all may games.

Bill

Me too, to be honest if the character sheet looks complex or cluttered I stop right there.

Quote from: HinterWeltCall me silly but I look for the character generation and character sheet. If I cannot grok the game from that, forget it. Thus, the design of all may games.

Bill

What Bill said. If the game isn't all about the player characters, then I'm not interested.

-clash