Quote from: AosTrue20 is all I play these days, and I am not so happy with the index in the core book. The companion is pretty okay though. I don't own the bestiary, at the risk of dragging things a bit OT- is it primarily fantasy oriented? Is it worth getting if you don't have a fantasy campaign?

It's heavily orientated towards fantasy. There are rules for sci-fi creature templates and whatnot, but in the main it's inspired by the D&D roster of creatures. The illustrations are suggestive of using them in other settings though, eg. a basilisk turning an astronaut to stone, a gnoll tearing up a cyberpunk bar, a demon crouching in what appears to be a space station corridor etc.

I really like it, but I'm highly partial to fantasy and genre mashups in general.

thanks, maybe i'll check it out if I ever have any disposable income again.

Quote from: AosDoes anyone know of  an rpg with a decent index?

Again, a question for which I can offer up Spycraft 2.0.

The core book is very dense. It's pretty much a requirement.

Quote from: AosDoes anyone know of  an rpg with a decent index?

For all of it's faults one of the things the people at Shadowrun do very well is index. Cross referencing is very easy.

Detailed Character Sheets - This is the primary indication to me that I won't be interested in a game.  In my experience, the level of detail on the character sheet is a pretty good indication of how crunchy the game system is.  If there's too many stats, derived stats, etc., I'll put the game back on the shelf.

Half-Page Stat Blocks - If I can't throw together an NPC or monster with gameable stats within a few sentences and a reasonably short amount of time, I'll move on to another game system.  I don't have hours for prep time any more, and I don't like having to hunt down stats in the book while GMing.

Rolemaster - I don't care if the cover says "Lite".  I don't buy it for a second.

Quote from: mysterycycleDetailed Character Sheets - This is the primary indication to me that I won't be interested in a game.  In my experience, the level of detail on the character sheet is a pretty good indication of how crunchy the game system is.  If there's too many stats, derived stats, etc., I'll put the game back on the shelf.

Heh. That's what put me off buying Burning Wheel when I checked it out online. That and scripted combat.  

QuoteHalf-Page Stat Blocks - If I can't throw together an NPC or monster with gameable stats within a few sentences and a reasonably short amount of time, I'll move on to another game system.  I don't have hours for prep time any more, and I don't like having to hunt down stats in the book while GMing.

I don't mind long stat blocks, but I need to be able to edit them for use in play. If by doing so I end up neutering npc abilities then the game may not be for me. It's my chief complaint with 3.x, where many stats have to be broken down in order to interact with applicable in-game effects.

I can't really complain about excessive crunch when I spent a year or two trying to design a highly accurate and realistic motor-racing game that was crunchy enough to need you to calculate cube roots (or use a simple spreadsheet!)

I was going to say multi-book systems, then I realised my first and favourite fantasy system has six books, five of which have required rules, and my Cyberpunk2020 collection of core book, supplimental role-specific rulebooks and additional settings books occupies three feet of shelf space.

So I guess my deal breaker is - any system that I don't know and would have to buy a dozen books to learn

My deal breakers are:

Games that are too light: Frankly, I need a certain amount of crunch in my RPG rules or else it just isn't that interesting. If the rules aren't detailed, I could just work some freeform game.

Games that don't contain rules for critical genre elements: If you have a sci-fi game about star fighter pilots, I want to see detailed rules about star fighters and star fighter combat. If this is a mecha game, I want lots and lots of (game) mechanincal detail about mecha.

Games where a single mechanic fits all: I understand that this is somehow the modern-day measure of an elegant design, but it generally leaves me cold. Different situations should have a different feel to them and the mechanics help convey the feel. Games where cyberhacking, or starships use the same stats and mechanics as the characters just don't do anything for me.

Games that feature clever mechanics with side effects: Clever mechanics are ok. If you can do everything with a single die roll, or by drawing poker hands, or by staging a cockroach race, so be it. But please make sure your ultra-clever mechanic does not have silly side effects. Yes, your game collaspes to-hit and damage into a single roll. That's great, except that the one time your putzy goblin hits your big fighter, it is automatically a critical because of the way you coupled the effects.

Cards used for task/conflict resolution.

Dice pools (will make exception is the system is very good) especially if the method of interpreting the dice is gimmicky. (nWoD = tolerable. L5R = teh suck.)

Bossy Personality Mechanics

Bossy GMing mecanics (i.e., cards dictate what the GM should do, the Synnibar rule, let it ride, etc.)

Quote from: Lord HobieHero System 5th Edition Revised, as only Steve Long can index.

I actually think that 5th Edition is a step backward in usability from 4th.  It's not awful, but the way things are organized, I actually need the index in 5th Edition in a way that I never did in 4th.  That's not a good thing.