Four WISHes, Insert Coin
The Fourth Game WISH is about system design.
Describe three systems you have gamed under: one you thought was good, one you thought was all right, and one you didn't care for.
I was going to say that I liked Aria, but that's going to have to be its own discussion somewhere down the line... [grinning]
I have to admit, it's very simplistic, oh, and the art in at least the first and second editions is terrible (meaning, not to my liking) but I've always enjoyed Nightlife's percentile system. (A good review of the game lies beyond this link.) It's easy to master the combat system (initiative, percentile, survival points) as well as design the characters via the creature traits you want. It's amazingly adaptable to all sorts of creatures, and styles. Best of all, as I've raved other places, it doesn't shepherd you into doing "the right thing." You can play anti-human characters, reverse gravity and blast yourself into orbit, and while you can make it cartoony you can also make it very real.
Now, here's the real question: does it support the genre? Well, it makes monsters generic, but they are in that world. Can humans play on the same level? Kind of, which allows for human-monster interaction...and not just by taming the monsters. Does it allow for angst as well as comedy? Yes.
Is Nightlife easy to GM? Yes, and no. As a system, yes. As a genre, not so much. As it's build around the concept of Splatterpunk, you can have things get out of control (and very messy) far too quickly for a GM who's, well, squeamish. As for playing, it's a little too easy to play, as well: the system, again, is simplistic. The plots have to be well developed to really catch one's attention.
For the game I thought was OK but not spectacular, I'll go with GURPS. I love GURPS supplements. They're like candy. I buy them for idea fodder, pretty much exclusively. I've used GURPS to design numerous characters, including figuring it's one of the best for making "myself" in game terms. I've run a couple of GURPS campaigns... but it's not my system of choice.
I ran as a player under a fellow who was a GURPS Savant. He knew page numbers by heart for the charts he needed. So the mechanics went fairly smoothly despite my usual statistically unlikely fortune with the dice. We did discover that a horse trampling someone did more damage to them than a sword, which I believe I used to my advantage.
...and yes, a force-field and a magical shield spell roughly provide the same effects, but I belong to the group that says, "Darn your mechanical evaluation, I want it to -feel- different, nevertheless."
GURPS support is excellent, however, and there are definitely games I will be thousands of times more likely to play once converted to GURPS terms. In Nomine and Deadlands come immediately to mind. There's a tiny little part of me that wishes they'd done Changeling but they couldn't help but improve Mage. GURPS Sourcebooks are the standard by which I measure all other gaming sourcebooks I buy.
Do the rules work? Most of the time. You can get fixes. At high point-levels, however, the stats become fairly meaningless. There is some advantage in its modular style; if I want to run the vehicle bits, I can look up the vehicle rules. If I want to run the magic=fatigue bits, I can grab the magic books. Or I can use just what's in the main book, with the disadvantage of the lack of fine tuning.
A game I didn't care for? Nobilis. I hate saying it, because I know so many people involved in it, but I really just keep ending up feeling like I've already got it on my shelf three times over. Sure, the new edition is lovely, but I keep thinking, "I already do this. I already have this. No one's taken advantage of it, but what's different from this and what I run?"
That eMode IQ test calls me a "Visual Mathematician." I've been using this today as an excuse to buy more miniatures.
I'm tired of games (you can usually tell them because they say they're for "advanced roleplayers") that figure since GMs are going to tweak and twiddle anyway, there's no point in offering much more than setting and plot.
I can go a long way with setting and plot, but I like consistency. I like reasons behind my decision making (even if it's, "The roll was a seven,") and I like to know that any impulse, any whimsical call in a game is being done with the good of the experience in mind. I like a stable foundation. I like my players being able to kick the tires (the figurative meaning) and test the ropes and whatnot and find them strong enough to hold.
A game that makes you rely on that, also suggests that you have to rely on a good gaming group, good communication, good blood sugar... and sets people up for lousy experiences when they're having a bad day.
As for a system I'd really like to try that I haven't? FUDGE. I have given it my eyeballs a few times, but never a fair try. I'm going to run a KULT game someday, with lots of Delta Green added in to the mix. I'm finding myself ambivalent-untolerant towards D&D3e, but I may be an old fogey at this point.