Do you read RPG books all the way through?

[the Jester]

Ever? Yes.

Always? No.

Often? Yes. Eventually? Yes.

Immediately? Rarely, but if it grips me... the 3e Manual of the Planes did this to me. So did the Book of Vile Darkness. On the other hand, I have books on my shelf I've never completely read- Cityscape, for example, looks really good, but I've just never quite gone through it. Same with Complete Champion- that one, I got too close to the end of the 3e life cycle, and so my motivation for reading it was waaay down.

 

[Lord Xtheth]

I voted no, because not usually, though I have read number of them straight through. I don't read spells, powers or monsters though, those are usually skipped until I need to read them.

This

Among the books I have read through word for word (in whatever order I feel like):
3.0 PHB
3.0 DMG
Vampire: the Masqurade
Iron Heroes
Book of Erotic Fantacy
Star Wars Saga Edition core book
Juicer Uprising
Rifts core book
Shadowrun 3e
4E DMG
Toon
Call of Cthulhu (Chaosium)
AD&D2 PHB
AD&D2 DMG
Players guide to Paladins
Players guide to Bards

 

[mathogre]

I've been playing D&D for about three and a half years. I have lots of 3.5 books, as well as a couple 3.0 accessory books. I've never read any of them cover to cover. However, I've read much of them and have paged through all of them. I run PCs; I'm not a DM.

I just created a new character for our campaign, a female human barbarian. I used many books to get ideas on how she would be. In addition to the PHB, I used the PHB II, DMG, DMG II, Frostburn (given we're in a Frostburn campaign), Complete Adventurer, Dungeonscape, Races of Destiny, and Masters of the Wild, as well as a Skip Williams essay from the Wizards site on how to play a classy barbarian. Very little from the supplemental books added directly to my new barbarian, but I think she's better for my having read it.

 

[Winterthorn]

I didn't take "ever" literally, and thus voted "no"

It really depends on the content, writing style and volume versus my spare time and interest how much of a book I read... But I have never read a gaming book cover to cover. Some books I have read the same sections of multiple times for clarity and/or to refresh my memory. But never the whole thing. There are also some books I've read say 90% of the content, especially thinner books packed with flavour. This latter group is the closest to "read all the way" I have ever achieved.

 

[Voadam]

I voted no, because not usually, though I have read number of them straight through. I don't read spells, powers or monsters though, those are usually skipped until I need to read them.

This

I didn't take "ever" literally, and thus voted "no"

People, I did mean ever and not usually. The poll is to count how many gamers have never read an rpg book all the way through versus those who have ever read one all the way through. "Just the Player's Handbook" "Just Clanbook Brujah" "Just the Player's Guide to Ptolus" or "Just Keep on the Borderlands" all count even if you own and have only skimmed hundreds of others.

 

[Voadam]

Heh, I just finished reading the Holmes 1977 D&D basic set book and things popped out at me that would have bugged me or I would have glazed over if I read it in isolated bits.

There is a strength spell that increases your str score by varying amounts depending on class. There are only three mechanical benefits listed for str in the book, giving bonus xp for fighters, class prerequisite for fighters, and in the sample dungeon some underwater survival mechanics. When I just read the spells section years ago I thought it would help in melee the way str score does in Moldvay basic, 1e and other versions of D&D.

Also in the combat section it says daggers and light weapons attack twice a round, swords and such attack 1/round, and heavy weapons like axes, polearms, flails, and two-handed swords attack once every two rounds. I would have thought this would be half of a combat system balanced by some other factor of weapons such as damage, reach, attack bonuses, etc. somewhere else in the rules. But no, every weapon does 1d6 and there is no compensating factor I found anywhere in the rules. Having read it through completely I can let it not bug me that I'm missing something in the text.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Typically, yes. Usually a quick speed-read once over, then a more in-depth read through - which is when the editorial mistakes really stand out

 

[jdrakeh]

Usually, but rarely do I read them in one sitting or even in order by chapter. That said, if a book is simply so dry that it makes a collegiate maths text look exciting by comparison, no, I probably won't read all of it (this is a big part of why I never read any edition of HERO or GURPS from cover to cover).

 

[Aus_Snow]

Some, yeah. I mean, it helps a great deal if they're only, say, 64 (?) pages or under - time is finite. . . or at least mine is! But I have read from cover to cover several much longer RPG books as well.

The majority though, no. And this thread reminds me once again just how much I appreciate good writing and thorough editing, in general, and most of all (due to a widespread paucity) when it comes to RPGs.

 

[howandwhy99]

I love to read modules, but mostly as a critic and game design editor. I find most modules horrifically designed and not exactly getting better. However I also find modules to be where the nitty gritty of roleplaying design is done and the number of ideas, truly cool new way of designing the game, to be worth at least skimming every one.