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. :D
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. :D
(http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/06/08/fondue_lifeofbrian_wideweb__470x318,0.jpg)
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
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.
That's what I look at first, too. You can tell a lot from sample characters, too.
Quote from: SeanIs there one rule that you always look for ?
Chargen, or more specifically, the structure of chargen. If chargen is unstructured (e.g., just a big pile of things to buy and a point total), then I generally think of the game as inadequate.
Quote from: BalbinusMe too, to be honest if the character sheet looks complex or cluttered I stop right there.
Ditto. From the character sheet, I can get a quick feel for what's emphasized and how fiddly the rules are.
This is especially true for free games that I don't know much about - I don't want to waste time reading every single game out there, so I quickly discard games that look unfun.
Drowning and falling.
Alright, honestly, I flip to the character sheet. More than two pages (I can always print it double-sided) and back it goes.
Character generation, especially classes or whatever the equivalent is in the game (Clans, Backgrounds, Careers, whatever) and skill resolution. With a good skill system I know I can make a game work, even if the combat system is so-so. If there's magic then that's an important section too. A game with a magic system that sucks tends to piss me off.
-=Grim=-
Quote from: BalbinusMe too, to be honest if the character sheet looks complex or cluttered I stop right there.
What he said.
Add to that, if there is a little diagram on the char sheet for hit location I put it back on the shelf as fast as I possibly can.
hrm, I guess I suck with 11 stats and hit locations. ;)
Bill
Character creation should be easy if I'm GMing and have a shit-ton of cool stuff I can use if I'm playing. The best games do both.
Task resolution should be at least partly random and favor the skilled character and the skilled player. I prefer single-die type but I'm not picky. I'd rather not roll more than six dice in one go.
The mechanics should cover all the bases. DnD doesn't need rules for anthropomorphic turtle bicycle jousts, but a cyberpunk game needs decent hacking rules.
There should be something nifty. It should be there when you need it and fade into the background when you don't. This can be things like hero points, sanity, whatever.
The end result should kinda make sense.
These days, if I'm flipping through a game in a store wondering whether I want to buy it, I go directly to the example of play, because a good example will a) show me the resolution mechanics at work and b) give me an idea of what you're meant to do with the game in question. (The Call of Cthulhu play example is really good at this, as is the one in the AD&D 1E Dungeon Master's Guide.) If I read the example of play and say to myself "Hey, I wouldn't have minded being at that game," it'll be that much more likely I'll look at the rest of the game. If I read it and think "Jesus, that must have been a really dull/annoying/stupid game session" I'm liable to put the game back on the shelf and walk away.
Once I've actually paid for a book, I'll tend to read things in chapter order on my first read-through. Most sensibly-arranged games these days go resolution mechanic -> character gen -> important subsystems -> setting anyhow.
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. Beyond that, I want to see how they handle multiple actions, particularly defensive actions--I like them reactive, because I hate it when you have to state you're "withholding" a defensive action at the start of the turn or else you don't get to defend.
Pete
Quote from: HinterWelthrm, I guess I suck with 11 stats and hit locations. ;)
Bill
Ain't nothin' appeals to everybody :)
Lotsa very smart responses in this thread.
I gotta admit to being a little stupid about it though, lately the very very first thing I do is find the auto fire rules. I'm a child at heart, what can I say?
Quote from: darLotsa very smart responses in this thread.
I gotta admit to being a little stupid about it though, lately the very very first thing I do is find the auto fire rules. I'm a child at heart, what can I say?
A lot of folk get really bugged about those in my experience, I suspect it may come from them knowing something about guns and most rpgs doing them fairly badly but I can't be sure as I know nothing about guns.
Yeah, it's really easy to make autofire rules too good, too bad, or too wrong.