How Do You Learn a System?

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
And is there something RPGs could do - be it organization or otherwise, that would make them easier for you to learn the system?

Hmm, I sort of skipped this question in my last post. But a couple of crucial things include the following:
  • Detailed Table of Contents at least two, preferably three levels in (seriously, sometimes two levels ain't enough). Chapter or Section Heading page numbers alone are NOT a real Table of Contents, IMO. This thing should NOT be optional in a TTRPG or ANY sort of "textbook", which is what TTRPG game manuals actually are. And if you include Section Headings and treat Chapters as one level inside the section head ADD THREE LEVELS MINIMUM.
  • Content Organization should be: Basic Rules/Intro immediately followed up by Character Creation first. Then details of character features (Abilities, Races, Classes, etc.), followed by Equipment, followed by detailed/combat Rules. Then lastly GM section and Setting. If the setting is too expansive and detailed it should probably be a separate book.
  • Use CLEAN Layout Design, with minimal, barely visible (if any) background images and Header/Footer/Frame elements, and avoid excessive use of images, particularly in the middle of text (top, down, sides or splash pages are OK and often help set the tone). This helps with readability, which indirectly helps learning the system and spotting information later on.
  • Include Rules-Light Writeup at the Intro or near the start of the book (as some have pointed out). This not only helps newbs, but also helps even veterans do a quick refresher later on when making characters or if they haven't played in a while.
 
I just thought about the fact that Greg Gordon did both of those games as well as Torg. He seems to know what he's doing.
 
I really have two ways. One is if I'm learning it so that I can play a character in someone else's game. In that case I ask the GM what their campaign is about and so on, then generate a character by going straight through the character generation system in the order presented (if that's possible), then jump in the deep end and try to learn the system in play—taught by, or along with, the other players. Lots of mistakes, lots of laughter, good times. But I guess that that is not really the context of this question.

When I'm trying to learn a system from the book with a view to perhaps introducing it to a group among whom no-one else knows it either, I start by skimming the text to find out what the game is for. My favourite place to find that out is in the second half of the introduction, after the introduction to roleplaying. If it's not there, my second-favourite place to find it is in a section of Designer's Comments, perhaps in the back or (better) in a separate section just after the introduction. And if there's no explanation in either place I look over the table of contents to try to get an idea of what kinds of settings, characters, adventures, scenes, and activities are covered by the rules.

Thus oriented, I turn to the one-page summary of the resolution system in the front of the resolution chapter, or at the back of the resolution chapter, or at the bottom of the character sheet, or wherever. If there isn't one, I skim the resolution rules to get a idea of what the numbers mean, just enough to make sensible decisions about whether to buy skill-1 or skill-15 in the things a character has to be good at.

Then I read once through character generation. Then I design a starting character by following the instructions in order.

And if I have had any serious trouble up to this point — if the game doesn't say what it is for, if there is no core resolution mechanic, if the core resolution mechanic is not succinctly explained in any obvious place, if I can't work out what the skills do or how good the different values are, or if the character generation process cannot actually be carried out by following the directions in order, then I give up on it. The game will moulder on my hard-drive until the next time I'm forced to "upgrade" my tech, at which time it will be lost.

If I've got through that okay I run a little solo exercise, such as a combat, to figure out the sequence of actions. If that's okay I skim through all the resolution procedures (e.g. fire combat, mêlée combat, stealth, shadowing, evasion, observation, chases and races (vehicular and foot), patrolling/guarding and infiltration, security systems and penetration, design, construction, diagnosis, repair, persuasion, influence, dissimulation, disguise, concealment, searching, scouting and whatever) so that I will know where to find them and what I'm expected to deal with by application of general rules. If I find that the skill definitions are badly muddled with the resolution rules (special resolution cases under skill descriptions, skill scopes implicitly defined in the resolution rules, etc.) I might get a bit mulish-looking about the mouth at this stage.


If everything is going well so far I might lure together a group for character generation and start an adventure or campaign. The questions that character-players ask and the help they ask for during character generation will guide me to the specifics that I need to learn. I learn the rest by playing the game and looking rules up as I need them.


As for what might make things easier for me:

  • There's no getting around the facts that I am now 57, short-sighted, and glaucomatous. Using clear print, reasonably large type, and a legible font on a plain white non-gloss page helps me more than I would have imagined thirty years ago. Remember that I have to look things up and find them on the page quickly during play.
  • Good organisation and clean layout are a practical necessity, not a fashion statement.
    • There has to be a detailed table of contents. Not just for looking up page numbers. Also so that i can read it an find out what the rules cover.
    • Unless the text is searchable, there has to be an index. If the text sometimes refers to (e.g.) "technology level", but in other places uses "tech level" and in others "TL", then it is not in practice searchable.
  • While I am all for graphical elements that help me find what I am looking for, or that illustrate things that would be hard to explain in worlds (e.g. movement rules, threatened squares, …), I am not so fond of decoration per se, especially when it compromises legibility and layout.
  • I like a clear, explicit, and reasonably succinct statement of what the game is meant for. What did the authors design it to focus on? What setting, genre, type of adventures, and style of roleplaying is it meant to support? Is it meant to function as a GMless storygame? As a dungeonbash miniatures wargame? Is it specialised for Delta-Green conspirators within the US security apparatus vs. Cthulhu? Jason Bourne and Miachael Westen vs. vampires? Is it a general-purpose adventure game? Let me know first thing.
  • I like a clear, succinct, and complete statement of the core resolution mechanics set out by itself somewhere easy to find. My favourite place for it is at the beginning of the resolution rules. I want to be able to work out what (e.g.) "Driving 10" means in effect before I start considering character generation. Use cases for the resolution system can follow (but they ought to be in the resolution rules, not the character generation rules).
  • I like the character representation system to be defined explicitly. What characters traits are there? What do they mean? What scales are they on? What is the difference between a "skill", a "field of familiarity", "advantage", and an "aspect"? I'm okay either with this going at the front of the character generation system, or with a definition and explanation of each type of trait appearing at the beginning of the section where you have to deal with it. But I need to know what these things are before I can assign values to them.
  • I find it very helpful if there is a clear sequence of steps to take in character generation that can be actually executed in the order given. It's okay if the given sequence contains bits that I will take shortcuts around once I am familiar. But it is not okay if I work through the chargen system as given and come across a point where I have to back-track and re-do.
  • I strongly favour a combat system that has an unambiguous sequence of actions, stated explicitly at the beginning.
  • If there is a list of items each of which has a value or (even moreso) several values associated with it — such as 27 skills each with a base value, cost per level, and base difficulty, or 11 hit locations each with a range on the location roll, an aiming modifier, and a damage modifier — then I want a table.
  • Use alphabetical order unless there is a reason not to. And if there is such a reason, tell me what order things are in so that I can find what I want without reading the whole list. If a list is in sections, include section headings.
  • I find 4th-grade arithmetic easier than memorising whether "excellent" is above "outstanding" or below it, and what is three steps up the ladder from "good". Also, I prefer algebraic expressions to verbal descriptions of algebraic expressions. Since (I hear) many players find the reverse, there is a case to be made for including both.
 
Last edited:
I definitely believe age is a factor. Like some of the rest of you, my absorption rate generally is a lot slower. One of the things I do are strategy games, and I'm finding Crusader Kings a very tough slog. I'd have lapped that up twenty years ago.

That being said, I forgot a factor about how I learn. I do not want to be told things. I want to read them for myself. This goes beyond game rules to stories, articles, etc; don't tell me in detail about the interesting thing you read, put the text in front of me. My retention rate is far greater.
 
I definitely like checking out the character sheet first, and character generation is always something I look at early. You can't get a handle on a game until you know what kind of characters exist in it. Beyond that, it really depends on what drew me to the game.

After that I'll usually take some notes, either from reference, or just as a way to process the information. If a game is on the crunchier side, I like to make a OneNote document that outlines the system. Most RPG books are designed more to teach you the system than to be useful table reference.

I've been running WFRP 4E off and on for a few years now, I am starting a new campaign, so I am putting together a OneNote doc that contains everything from the game. I'll use either screenclips from the PDF or just boil something down to an outline, as I have here.

View attachment 35790

The original entry in the book is fine for explanation, but I think my entry above is a lot more useful as table reference than having to parse this while the whole group stares at you, waiting.
View attachment 35791

Making detailed notes helps me spot things I missed when I simply read the book, and as I have OneNote on my tablet, I can call up anything at the table in seconds. It's a lot more useful than a GM screen.

If you look at the bottom of the left column, I also have a secret GM section, where I keep maps, NPC stats, adventure notes, notes taken during the session, etc.
I did this with WFRP1 a few years ago, put it all in OneNote. Very easy to incorporate rules changes that way.
 
I tend to skim through the book first. I'll probably glance at the character sheet to see if anything interesting jumps out at me; however, as I rarely consider official character sheets remotely useful, I'm unlikely to pay too much attention to it.

I'll then start reading cover to cover. Most likely, I'll end up jumping around a bit as different things take my interest. I'll finish it off, realise I've skipped a bunch, and then go back and read through the whole thing more thoroughly. It is extremely unlikely I've made a character by this point; this will most likely happen once I understand the system well enough to start building my own character sheet.

At some point -- possibly prior to the start of the process listed above, I'll almost certainly hunt down the most useful forum with information relating to the game in question and devour all the details and thoughts I can find from people who've actually been playing it.

Interestingly, although ICE was known for a fairly esoteric rules layout, it would seem it should work fairly well for all the "make a character" people in this thread.

  1. Explain the concepts behind a character's stats and attributes, and what they do, in broad terms.
  2. Explain how to create a character.
  3. Explain how to actually use all that stuff in game.
 
I tend to skim through the book first. I'll probably glance at the character sheet to see if anything interesting jumps out at me; however, as I rarely consider official character sheets remotely useful, I'm unlikely to pay too much attention to it.
I've never found it significantly useful either. About the only times I find it insightful is when the system features skills directly descending from attributes and the character sheet presents it that way. Something like the sheets for d6 Star Wars, Mekton first edition, or the original Torg.

I tend to have a mild dislike of rules which are embedded in the official character sheet and presented nowhere else. WHFRP3e has an advancement mechanic like this. Without an official character sheet there are swaths of the advancement system that won't make any sense from just reading the book.
 
As to what I do with a new system ... I read through character creation -- including all the options for races, archetypes etc -- completely. And over again. For the most part, that tells me much of what I need to know, and whether I want to bother with the system at all. I don't sweat things like core mechanics; every system has some method of resolution, and they pretty much do the same things. After that, I usually muddle through creating a test character.

After that, I skim the whole rest of the book.
That surprises me:shade:.
Besides, I have indeed found that a +2 makes a lot more difference if we're talking about a 2d6 system, than it does when we're talking about a d20 system:thumbsup:!
 
Hmm, I sort of skipped this question in my last post. But a couple of crucial things include the following:
You have some really good organized thoughts about this, can I pick your brain some...
  • Detailed Table of Contents
Interesting, I don't normally even use the table of contents. I like two levels but three levels, then it becomes closer to an index for me. I like my table of contents to be short a page if I can, two at most. The idea is I want to be able to see all the content outline without flipping pages. If the table of contents goes beyond 4 pages I never use them.
What are your views on indexes?
  • Content Organization should be: Basic Rules/Intro immediately followed up by Character Creation first. Then details of character features (Abilities, Races, Classes, etc.), followed by Equipment, followed by detailed/combat Rules. Then lastly GM section and Setting. If the setting is too expansive and detailed it should probably be a separate book.
What do you think of the idea of separate books for intro/basic rules? A separate book for character creation? And last but not least something very much playing around with, a separate book for charts and tables?

On the last bit, I very much love charts and tables in my for two main reasons:
(1) it condenses information, typically each column in a chart is 1/2-1 page in the typical expository format; so a 1 page chart can contain the information spread over 4-8 pages [this is based on my long time practice of making charts for character creation comparison for many games, and oft 20 pages can be reduced to 2 charts];
(2) charts allow easy side-by-side comparison of the different rules, character creation choices, etc. instead off flipping back and forth between the sections on the various species. I really don't like the presentation of character species, class etc. options and details in a serial fashion (unless it fits on 2 pages). Makes comparison difficult and slow. No reason key things could not be presented side by side. My view is a lot of RPG formatting is stuck in how it was done in the 70s and 80s with no realization that they layout back then was very much limited by the technology of the day.

I am thinking of putting charts and tables in a separate book so you can have one book open to the text and the other to the charts, also after a short time one often no longer needs the text, that chart suffices.

  • Use CLEAN Layout Design,
Amen...but I fear many won't think it is an rpg rule book without full color border and background, and lots of art.
 
You have some really good organized thoughts about this, can I pick your brain some...

Interesting, I don't normally even use the table of contents. I like two levels but three levels, then it becomes closer to an index for me. I like my table of contents to be short a page if I can, two at most. The idea is I want to be able to see all the content outline without flipping pages. If the table of contents goes beyond 4 pages I never use them.
What are your views on indexes?

The reason why I think multiple levels are important is because rules manuals tend to include a lot of information per chapter divided into multiple subsections sometimes across dozens of pages. So if I want to look up a specific rule (action sequence, actions in combat, combat options, healing and recovery, etc.), for example, or perhaps a specific skill (or at least a skill group/category) or how to make a skill roll, etc., just knowing where the Rules or Skills chapters are alone isn’t very helpful to me—specially if I have to do it in the middle of play.

I’ve ran into this problem a bunch of times, specially when reading White Wolf games, because they only include three section headers (something like Setting/World, Character Creation/Abilities and Rules) in their “table of contents” and expect you to go through the entire section of the book to find the specific topic you’re looking for. Pathfinder 2e is another example of this, where they include only Chapter Headers, but there’s a crap ton of information in almost every chapter, like the Classes chapter for example, which has 12 different classes with a bunch of info each spread out across over a hundred pages deep (thankfully the PDF has bookmarks at least, but people relying on printed copies are screwed).

Another benefit of detailed table of contents is that it gives me a bird’s eye view of the different topics covered in the manual, including class abilities and stuff that will help me have a general idea of what sort of info I need to include in my character and where to find it. And also what sort of rules I have to work with, particularly from a GM point of view.

I’m not a fan of Indexes because I like to look at the information sequentially in the order that it’s presented in the book, while Indexes are more like alphabetical lists of terms with page numbers where to find info on those terms. Problems is that if I don’t even know what the specific term used in the game is I won’t be able to find it in an Index. But in a detailed Table of Contents I just have to look up the chapter header most likely to include the information I’m looking for, then look down from there to find the subsection most likely to have it.

What do you think of the idea of separate books for intro/basic rules? A separate book for character creation? And last but not least something very much playing around with, a separate book for charts and tables?

On the last bit, I very much love charts and tables in my for two main reasons:
(1) it condenses information, typically each column in a chart is 1/2-1 page in the typical expository format; so a 1 page chart can contain the information spread over 4-8 pages [this is based on my long time practice of making charts for character creation comparison for many games, and oft 20 pages can be reduced to 2 charts];
(2) charts allow easy side-by-side comparison of the different rules, character creation choices, etc. instead off flipping back and forth between the sections on the various species. I really don't like the presentation of character species, class etc. options and details in a serial fashion (unless it fits on 2 pages). Makes comparison difficult and slow. No reason key things could not be presented side by side. My view is a lot of RPG formatting is stuck in how it was done in the 70s and 80s with no realization that they layout back then was very much limited by the technology of the day.

I am thinking of putting charts and tables in a separate book so you can have one book open to the text and the other to the charts, also after a short time one often no longer needs the text, that chart suffices.

I think that could work as play aids/guides or "digest" handouts to give to players, particularly if you keep them as a PDF you can print or email to other people in the group. But having everything in a single tome has its benefits, if you want to go in deep. I suppose each has its pros and cons, but it wouldn't hurt to have extra "digest" material to handout to players, specially since different people learn in different ways, and some people are more visually oriented, so having charts and stuff to illustrate everything can help them learn the material. Other people might be more detail oriented and need more in-depth material or something they can really dive in.

Amen...but I fear many won't think it is an rpg rule book without full color border and background, and lots of art.

Unfortunately yes. I just wish publishers used more elegant, but clean layout elements if they really want to pack their books with art, kinda like they handled it in the Numenera core book (and I think other Cypher games as well).
 
V VisionStorm While I strongly agree with you about the importance of table of content. I also strongly disagree with your opinion about indexes.

They're so important and working hand in hand with the table of content really make for a much more readable, useable rpg book. I think a great example of that is the GURPS books, which have good table of contents, indexes and reference tables at the end.

While I like art and all, I'd toss the money spent on art towards hiring someone to do who could do proper, useable layout, editing, font type and size along with indexes, reference tables and a table of content.
 
Last edited:
I personally find a minimally competent index far more useful than a table of contents. If I'm hunting for something in a book, I'm looking for a specific term. A Table of Contents might show me organizationally the general place it might be. The index is going to show me exactly where it is, regardless of what category it actually gets arranged in.

I find a lot of specific information in RPGs does not get organized under the sections I would first think they'd get placed under. Plus, chances are I'm already familiar with the general organization of the book from skimming it anyway so the Table of Contents usually isn't providing anything useful on that front.
 
I find a lot of specific information in RPGs does not get organized under the sections I would first think they'd get placed under. Plus, chances are I'm already familiar with the general organization of the book from skimming it anyway so the Table of Contents usually isn't providing anything useful on that front.
This. Nicely stated.
 
I'm trying to think if I've ever "taken notes" while reading a rule book. Probably not, I didn't take good notes in college either.

I'm not sure about how much I use indices in play. The systems I run these days don't have them... I do use find on the PDF for Bushido. Other things I just read through, using the table of contents to at least guess which pages to search.

Indices ARE good though.
 
V VisionStorm While I strongly agree with you about the importance of table of content. I also strongly disagree with your opinion about indexes.

They're so important and working hand in hand with the table of content really make for a much more readable, useable rpg book. I think a great example of that is the GURPS books, which have good table of contents, indexes and reference tables at the end.

While I like art and all, I'd toss the money spent on art towards hiring someone to do who could do proper, useable layout, editing, font type and size along with indexes, reference tables and a table of content.
I personally find a minimally competent index far more useful than a table of contents. If I'm hunting for something in a book, I'm looking for a specific term. A Table of Contents might show me organizationally the general place it might be. The index is going to show me exactly where it is, regardless of what category it actually gets arranged in.

I find a lot of specific information in RPGs does not get organized under the sections I would first think they'd get placed under. Plus, chances are I'm already familiar with the general organization of the book from skimming it anyway so the Table of Contents usually isn't providing anything useful on that front.

YMMV, I suppose. Sometimes this stuff is largely a matter of preference, what keyword you're looking for, or how information is organized in the book. But in my experience Indexes have rarely been useful for me because I might not remember the exact term used for the rule I'm looking for, or it might be a term with potentially multiple uses, such as "healing", which can be a skill, spell, potion, magic item, etc. Then the Index will include multiple page numbers for the same term, and I have to jump between different pages, or cross reference with the TOC to figure out which of those pages might actually be the one with the information I'm looking for. Indexes also tend to be longer, with more keywords than there are subsection headings, so I might have to do more page flipping to find a matching term for what I'm looking for than browsing through the TOC. So if I have to pick one or the other, I'd go with the TOC. But more methods of finding stuff in a book are always useful, even if I personally don't use them much.
 
I read the book. Typically, I start at the beginning, and when I get to the end, I stop.
 
I can say... Whatever it takes for a game I'm interested in :smile:

My preference is when games go from general to specific. I think Pathfinder 2nd edition is a good example of this. After a general overview of the setting and what type of game it is, it starts with the D20 + modifier vs. Target core mechanic explanation... Then it goes to the character sheet. Gives you a general idea of what the character sheet means before you plot anything down on one.

Character creation does the same, you pick some core concepts before you funnel down to the individual feats. Pathfinder is a game where things work in a very specific way, for more interpretive mechanics I think the same sort of philosophy can apply.

I am much less enamoured these days with opening a book with a short story and then a huge setting dump. I prefer when the setting is in a much later, GM section.
 
Then the Index will include multiple page numbers for the same term, and I have to jump between different pages, or cross reference with the TOC to figure out which of those pages might actually be the one with the information I'm looking for.
It sounds like you're describing a poorly done index. A good index should make it clear what the context is for each reference -- you look up healing, and then have sub-entries for the spell called Healing, use of healing herbs, natural healing or whatever. If there's no meaningful way to distinguish the entries, then the index may not be all that helpful, but that's not the fault of the index, it's because the rules have apparently been scattered haphazardly all over the place.

Personally, I find I rarely use an index but, on those occasions when I do, I'm very glad if it's there and done well.
 
Quick Skim (or if short enough, just RTFM). Then go in-depth on the ideas that didn't stick the first time reading, then create a character.
 
It sounds like you're describing a poorly done index. A good index should make it clear what the context is for each reference -- you look up healing, and then have sub-entries for the spell called Healing, use of healing herbs, natural healing or whatever.

That’s one reason why a text search function hasn’t quite replaced a good index yet.
 
Are you used to White Wolf books, perchance:shade:?
Actually don't think I have any White Wolf stuff, but I started with the LBBs (an acronym that applies to two different 70's era RPGs) and ole' TFT. Perhaps it was an allergic reaction to the detailed Table of contents in old wargames :smile:

Really it is more that I can just as easily find what looking for by flipping pages in most games. And if play the game at all it gets burned into memory.
Also if something is in a niche non-logical place it just gets ignored by me, I had practice with AD&D for that and ignoring the parry rule. :smile:
 
The reason why I think multiple levels are important is because rules manuals tend to include a lot of information per chapter divided into multiple subsections sometimes across dozens of pages. So if I want to look up a specific rule (action sequence, actions in combat, combat options, healing and recovery, etc.), for example, or perhaps a specific skill (or at least a skill group/category) or how to make a skill roll, etc., just knowing where the Rules or Skills chapters are alone isn’t very helpful to me—specially if I have to do it in the middle of play.

I’ve ran into this problem a bunch of times, specially when reading White Wolf games, because they only include three section headers (something like Setting/World, Character Creation/Abilities and Rules) in their “table of contents” and expect you to go through the entire section of the book to find the specific topic you’re looking for. Pathfinder 2e is another example of this, where they include only Chapter Headers, but there’s a crap ton of information in almost every chapter, like the Classes chapter for example, which has 12 different classes with a bunch of info each spread out across over a hundred pages deep (thankfully the PDF has bookmarks at least, but people relying on printed copies are screwed).

Another benefit of detailed table of contents is that it gives me a bird’s eye view of the different topics covered in the manual, including class abilities and stuff that will help me have a general idea of what sort of info I need to include in my character and where to find it. And also what sort of rules I have to work with, particularly from a GM point of view.

First, thank you for your detailed response.

I agree with you on the birds eye view value of to table of contents. That is why I like it on two pages so can grok it all at once, 4 pages perhaps.

On your specific examples...I may pass on games that are organized rules that way.
The class thing in Pathfinder2e sounds like how the info was conveyed in AD&D via text, and long winded at that.
One of my favorite games, Atomic Highway, does the same, but luckily it is very succinct, each "class" taking less than a page. Still the starting skills you get are given in text, as a list in a paragraph. I don't really care for that form of presentation as the sole form.

Personally, I prefer rules to be very succinct, so wonder if (action sequence, actions in combat, combat options, healing and recovery, etc.) only takes up 6 pages the need for a three level table of contents. In addition, I personally put a lot of stuff like "combat options" into a table then would have a chapter appendix giving more verbose type exposition on it, or perhaps even in a separate book as detailed notes.

What do you think of this idea: I have gotten to the point of putting in the header the Section/Chapter and a short title. For example, if Magic Users appear in Chapter 3, I might put in the heard in the upper right "3: MAGIC USERS" in Arial Black 12-14 pt font with color set to 80-90% black. The idea being can easily flip to find.
 
Actually don't think I have any White Wolf stuff, but I started with the LBBs (an acronym that applies to two different 70's era RPGs) and ole' TFT. Perhaps it was an allergic reaction to the detailed Table of contents in old wargames :smile:
Oh, and I thought it's just being used to the table of content being basically useless...:grin:

Really it is more that I can just as easily find what looking for by flipping pages in most games. And if play the game at all it gets burned into memory.
Also if something is in a niche non-logical place it just gets ignored by me, I had practice with AD&D for that and ignoring the parry rule. :smile:
Practice makes perfect:thumbsup:!
 
Basic task resolution, Combat and then Char Gen and usually through the process of "This system is like system X which I know already except Y,Z, etc"
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top