Games that are more fun to play than to read

[Heathen72]

A counterpoint to this thread, name some games that are more fun to play than to 'read' i.e.,

• were the games really poorly organized but good once you have worked them out?
• was the gameplay good, but the rules hellish to learn?
• were the writers really bad at writing, but really good at rules?
• were they all rules and no fluff?

Some examples from my experience

• Rolemaster
• Advanced Dungeons and Dragons
• Gear Krieg

(actually Gear Krieg was crap to play and run)

 

[Neonchameleon]

4e. Very definitely. Read like a rulebook, plays nicely.
Dread. And most other rules light games. The secret is in the playing.

 

[FreeXenon]

Alternity.

Its rules can be quite cumbersome and hard to put together, but it was a blast to play.

 

[ggroy]

Mutants and Masterminds.

Chargen was major analysis paralysis. Though it played well once the characters were created.

 

[TerraDave]

4E is a prime, prime example of this. (though they are now trying to do better).

But neither 3E nor 2E were great reads either. (2E core may have been the worst, though so much stuff came out for that edition you will find good writting if you look for it).

1E was a potentially difficult read, but also very rewarding, and by far the "AD&D" I am most likely to read now outside 4E. (Early 80's basic and things for it probably the best case of what you read is what you get for D&D).

 

[nai_cha]

A game that's mentioned on the other thread, Shadowrun.

I find the Corebook really disorganised and poorly written. Can't say much about the supplement I do have, Arsenal, because I only look at the Martial Arts bits and the Vehicle bits, but even the little I've read I find highly disorganised as well. As for the fluff bits? The premise is incredibly interesting but I cannot stomach the writing style. Our group keeps saying the system is clunky, too swingy, until now we still have to stop and ask, "wait, what am I rolling for again?" yet we're still playing it. Character creation is like IDEK, I need to have someone walk me through it even after having tried to read the book.

But hot damn I have the most fun at Shadowrun games.

 

[Umbran]

It seems to me that if your game is more fun to read than to play, then you're doing something wrong - people will just reread the rulebooks, a d never mind playing the game.

Most games are really pretty dry, no-fun reads. They need to serve as reference documents on algorithms and rules - that doesn't lend itself to bright and engaging writing.

 

[prosfilaes]

If you're selling books, you're doing something right. I think a large number of roleplayers have large collections of books they're never going to run.

They need to serve as reference documents on algorithms and rules

Some part of the main book, yes. But overemphasis on that is a way to drive out players who don't want to work through a hundred pages of detailed rules on AoO and grapples. And if it's not a generic system, it has to grab the reader; if you're promising dragons versus titans at the dawn of time, it's never going to get played unless reading it make me feel driven about your version of dragons versus titans at the dawn of time.

 

[Festivus]

I never seemed to have trouble digesting how to play 4E from the rulebooks... but I am an engineer by trade and prefer a reference book.

Boot Hill is one of those games that, to this day, I can't stand to read the rule book for, but it's a heck of a fun game.

 

[Croesus]

The last two versions (5E and 6E) of Hero are incredibly dry reads. 5th edition felt like reading a technical textbook. 6th edition appears to have kept the same style, though the sidebars help break the tedium.

That said, Champions/Hero is still my favorite system of all time. There have been so many memorable scenes in the games, and I find the rules - once learned - play smoothly at the table. I can't define it, but there's something about this game that brings out the best in the groups I've gamed with.