When playing/writing traditional games based on established IPs such as Star Wars, Doctor Who, Conan, etc. do you prefer
>a ruleset that works well in-game but might miss some of the flavor of the setting
>a ruleset that captures the flavor/tropes of the setting in a way that might make the rules clunky
Why not go for
>a ruleset that captures the flavor/tropes of the setting in a way that works well in-game
you fucking shitty faggot?
In conclusion, the things you listed are shit and you should shut up about them forever.
I prefer the second one. Because you can always have some house rules or homebrew it up to fix some clunky rules. So, it shouldn't be a big deal if some rules are bad. But to take out the flavor of the setting? That's a lot harder to put back in.
What the fuck, dude? OP just asked a question. Obviously what you said would be ideal, but that isn't always the case in games that have established settings. Tone the fuck down and read the sticky, pal.
I always think when adapting an established setting, focusing on themes and style over granular details is important. If I want to tell a story in the style of another work, I want to be supported in doing so, and I don't care if they have to compromise on some particular details. When transitioning from one medium to another, things are going to have to change. Some tropes and ideas that work great in a book or a movie just aren't functional in an RPG.
>but that isn't always the case in games that have established settings
Sure, there are occasions where you'll be forced to choose between usability and emulation of the genre.
Those occasions are vastly outnumbered by instances where designers didn't give enough of a fuck to find the third solution. It's far better to assume that the third solution exists and keep hammering for it until you're weeping blood than it is to just go "Yeah well players prefer [usability/emulation] in general, so we'll just take that road by default."
The question OP posed, in of itself, is poisonous to designers.
>Some tropes and ideas that work great in a book or a movie just aren't functional in an RPG.
How do you mean this? The ideas work the same. Take the trope of the lone hero on a journey. That works just as well no matter how you tell the story whether it be a book, movie, or game. The way you tell or play that trope out changes, but the ideas themselves work just as well, they just need to bend a little depending on style.
I get that. Obviously the ideal is great rules that fit the game and do justice to the setting. I get you there, but there's no reason to storm in shitposting about it like that. That was my point.
Just as an example, the idea of a single main protagonist doesn't work in RPGs. Having immensely uneven party abilities, with some people godlike and others almost useless, also doesn't work outside of very niche cases. There are a lot of things which don't transfer between mediums, even if there are also those which do.
>Just as an example, the idea of a single main protagonist doesn't work in RPGs
Depends. Tabletop RPGs? No, because there's more than one player. But video games pull it off easily all the time in their RPGs.