rules or world first?

[Crothian]

I'm finishing off a review of a new setting, Etherscope by Goodman Games, and this question really came up for some unknown reason. It seems that d20 games and setting have a habit of placing the rules and mechancis in front of the actual setting. Other games tend to do it the other way around and I was just wondering is this something people care about. I personally perfer to read about the setting and then seen had the rules fit in that. Readign the rules first leaves me wondering how it fits together.

So, in this poll, its very simple which do you perfer first in a setting book?

 

[Wombat]

I prefer the setting information first, mainly because I am rules-amphibious. The rules are often of less interest me in a setting book, as I am probably looking at it for ideas I can steal borrow for whatever I am running currently, rather than necessarily for the game system the setting was created for.

So rules are definitely of secondary importance to me.

 

[Kid Socrates]

Setting information. I believe the rules exist only to serve the setting, and therefore should take a back seat to the setting info itself.

Exception: New races. They should be in the front as always, as otherwise the setting info will make zippo sense. Imagine trying to read Eberron without reading about the warforged first. You'd be all sorts of confused, because no matter how many context clues you got, you wouldn't get the full picture.

 

[fafhrd]

I prefer the setting information first, mainly because I am rules-amphibious.

huh? :\

 

[JoeGKushner]

You need an "other" option.

For example, if it's a GURPS book, I pretty much know what I'm getting into. If it's a d20 book, the closer it cleaves to the d20 system in terms of balance and utility, the more likely I am to get it and use it as I can add different bits to my own campaign. The days of getting campaign books to run campaigns in them, are dwindling down. I think Eberron was probably one of the last, and that was because of the support from WoTC in Dungeon and the 32 page adventurers.

 

[lukelightning]

Rules. I want a game that I want to play, that isn't broken, and is enjoyable. This is all dependant on rules. No matter how good a setting is, if the rules are unplayable or unenjoyable or whatever, I can't bring myself to play it.

If I wanted a fictional setting and nothing else I'd read a novel.

 

[Crothian]

If I wanted a fictional setting and nothing else I'd read a novel.

Hence why there are rules in a setting. No one is talking about absecne of rules, just which is first. But your example is a bit incorrect as most novels fail to show the setting like it would be needed to be used in a RPG. All one needs to do is take a look at novels that have been made into RPGs to see that.

 

[Dog Moon]

Originally posted by Kid Socrates
Setting information. I believe the rules exist only to serve the setting, and therefore should take a back seat to the setting info itself.

Exception: New races. They should be in the front as always, as otherwise the setting info will make zippo sense. Imagine trying to read Eberron without reading about the warforged first. You'd be all sorts of confused, because no matter how many context clues you got, you wouldn't get the full picture.

I agree with this, though I hadn't thought of the races until he mentioned it. I want setting information to get me interested in the setting and then as I read the setting, the rules to back it up. I want to be told first that maybe Magic is crazy because of whatever reason and then read the rules for what happens when Magic is used. To read it the other way would only be confusing.

 

[sjmiller]

I prefer to have the setting information first. I like to get the flavor of the setting before slogging through the rules governing that setting. A good example of this design is the Shadowrun main book. It sets the tone of the setting and gives you a real good idea what it is about before telling you how to run the system.

Oh, and rules include new races. If the setting information is so confusing that I cannot get the gist of a new race from it, then there's something wrong with the setting information. Besides, it's not hard to flip back into the new rules section and learn about a race if you have to.

 

[diaglo]

i guess setting cuz i'm gonna have to convert it to OD&D(1974) anyway.