Do you want a new general d100 subforum?

[Atgxtg]

And that is the problem with separating the forums.

 

When I say Stormbringer, I am talking about the one that I know and started with, Stormbringer 1. When I say RuneQuest, I am talking about all the versions of RQ that I have played/used (RQ2 onwards), but when I say RQ2, RQ3, RQM/MRQ, RQM2/MRQ2, RQ6 or Legend then I am talking about specific editions with specific rules. If we have a RuneQuest forum then that is managed by the current guardians of RQ and they generally talk about RQ6, which is fair enough.... 

Exactly. Several times Darkholme and I have crossed circuited each other by referring to different editions of a particular RPG. 

 

Chances are, when I mention an RPG I'm thinking of the one that I'm most familiar with. Now I can see why the current, "living" version of an RPG might be considered the "default" and that is fine, but there are a lot of "dead" editions of RPGs and lots of room for confusion.

 

For instance, in Darkholme last post he mentioned that to him Stormbringer means Stormbringer  5e. Now I'm willing to bet money that what he considers to be Stormbringer 5e isn't what I consider to be Stormbringer 5E ( to me that's Elric!).

 

Before we subdivide the forums any further, we probably need to work out a way to figure out which RPG everyone else is talking about. Perhaps we need to do up a list of all the editions and give them sort of 3 or 4 letter abbreviation to eliminate the guesswork. 

[MatteoN]

Just what is a "General d100" topic?

 

"How many times does d6 go into d100?"

[Darkholme]

Just what is a "General d100" topic?

When I am looking to discuss/compare/contrast multiple d100 games in a single thread, or when I want to talk about homebrewed game mechanics which are not tied to a single specific d100 game (a good number of the threads I've started – and exactly what LoZ has requested a strong desire for us not to post in the RQ Board. Also, when I am looking to discuss a game which does not have a board.

 

You are correct, I was referring to the game with the title Stormbringer 5e, because I figured others would see it as such. But when I actually think about Stormbringer, I do think Stombringer 5=Elric! and Stormbreaker 5.1, or 5.25, or 5 revised (whatever you want to call it) is what was published as "Stormbringer 5e", and then Stormbringer 6 would be Magic World.

[Atgxtg]

LOL! When I think of Magic World I think of Worlds of Wonder. So we are really come at this from very different directions. 

[Darkholme]

LOL! When I think of Magic World I think of Worlds of Wonder. So we are really come at this from very different directions. 

It is really unfortunate that they recycled the names. What else would you have me call it though? lol.

 

Yeah, I didn't play d100 back in the day. I started gaming around 1999-2000, and didn't start playing things other than D&D & cWoD until 2008-2009. My knowledge of the older games comes from me hunting them down on ebay/amazon/noble knight, finding them in the used bin at my FLGS, and PDF purchases. For me when it comes to d100 games, I am almost entirely looking from present releases back. I started d100 with MRQ2.

[Atgxtg]

I don't think you're calling them the wrong things, just that the situation makes it harder at times to know what someone is referring to and thus what they mean by something. 

 

In my case, I played some AD&D early on, but made the jump to Strombringer (1E) and then RQ2 pretty quickly. I've pretty much focused on skill based RPGs since. So we are coming at this from rather different perspectives, and the terminology problems leads to some miscommunication and confusion here and there. 

 

It's also probably why we don't see eye to eye on "game balance". In D&D style of gaming, game balance is one of the foundations of the RPG - and the concept is drive home over and over in he rules. With skill based RPGs the idea has generally been rejected as artificial and disruptive. 

[Darkholme]

It's also probably why we don't see eye to eye on "game balance". In D&D style of gaming, game balance is one of the foundations of the RPG - and the concept is drive home over and over in he rules. With skill based RPGs the idea has generally been rejected as artificial and disruptive. 

Sure its artificial. I'm not sure I agree with you regarding it being disruptive though, and most other skill based RPGs I've seen make some attempt at it (all versions of WoD, & Warhammer 40k rpg, frex). I would argue it results in less situations where players are feeling overshadowed and less situations where some players feel they're carrying around dead weight that doesn't contribute enough. Both of those situations are unfun.

 

You couldn't pay me to play AD&D. Its so clunky and badly designed. ugh. lol. Well. okay, not quite true. I would probably play it if you were paying me to.

 

But the game balance discussion is off-topic for the thread, which is regarding forum renaming/creation.

[Atgxtg]

I just raised it to show how we are coming from different gaming backgrounds and tend to mean different RPG when using certain names. 

[Darkholme]

I just raised it to show how we are coming from different gaming backgrounds and tend to mean different RPG when using certain names. 

Hmm. Okay, Sure.

I agree that tagging threads when referring to specific games would certainly be helpful in providing clarity. I think any time I've been referring to a specific game in a thread subject I have tagged the thread title. However, in the future I will make efforts to be more diligent so that nobody is unsure what I am talking about.

 

And yes, our gaming backgrounds are quite different. I started gaming just as D&D 3.0 came out, played lots of D&D3.5 and cWoD and Trinity/Aeon/Aberant, picked up Pathfinder, played lots and lots of that, Picked up 4e, played it for about 6 months before I never wanted to play it again, and started to branch out and try other games around when Pathfinder came out, of the ones I played for any real amount of time, first it was nWoD, then Rolemaster, then Unisystem, then Shadowrun4e, then MRQII, RQ6, Mutants & Masterminds, and most recently: Edge of the Empire. I've tried out lots of other systems as well, and read more than that without having yet played them, but those are the ones I have more than a a dozen sessions of experience with.

[MrJealousy]

I'm beginning to think that there may be a use for a 'Generic d100' forum, probably in 'The D100 Family' group.

 

If you want to talk about BRP then these generic threads are starting to confuse the purity of the 'Basic Roleplaying' thread... make room for it and I could just ignore them and only look at what I come here for, which is BRP (with a sideline in Glorantha).

 

I suppose the only other real option would be for someone to start a Generic d100 website and forum. However, seeing as when I do a Google on 'd100 forum' the top 5 results are all about Nikon cameras and number 6 is this website (!), that may be the stupid option.

[Darkholme]

I'm beginning to think that there may be a use for a 'Generic d100' forum, probably in 'The D100 Family' group.

 

If you want to talk about BRP then these generic threads are starting to confuse the purity of the 'Basic Roleplaying' thread... make room for it and I could just ignore them and only look at what I come here for, which is BRP (with a sideline in Glorantha).

 

I suppose the only other real option would be for someone to start a Generic d100 website and forum. However, seeing as when I do a Google on 'd100 forum' the top 5 results are all about Nikon cameras and number 6 is this website (!), that may be the stupid option.

 

I can understand the frustration. Similar frustration occurs if you're trying to talk about several games or generic mechanics present in several games and everyone assumes you're referring to the BRP core book.

[Hexelis]

Communication is the key, just specify what you're talking about.

[Darkholme]

Communication is the key, just specify what you're talking about.

I was under the impression that I had been, what with the tagging of threads with things like [General d100] and the like. That has not removed the confusion.

[Guest Vile Traveller]

The problem arises with long threads, where people cannot be expected to continually re-state which game they are referring to. I've decided to come down in favour of an additional generic D100 board as well as the specific BRP board.

[soltakss]

Communication is the key, just specify what you're talking about.

 

and

 

 

I think the "you" was a general one, meaning "everyone", rather than a specific one, meaning you.

 

This has always been an issue and always will be.

 

Don't take it personally, as everyone does the same thing.

 

If I talk about a rule in RQ that I have always used, then it might confuse someone who uses RQ6 or who uses a slightly different rule from BRP.

 

Sometimes it helps to be slightly vague, as that does not pin a discussion down to a certain version.

[Atgxtg]

Yup. the whole naming thing is a confusing mess - especially with so many different editions and companies involved over the nearly 40 year history. Miscommunicate and confusion are probably the status quo.  

[MrJealousy]

Miscommunicate and Confusion...

should be the name of the new thread

 

Actually that would be poor english, it should be 'Miscommunicate and Confuse'.

[Trifletraxor]

Back on track - thankfully the poll is in favor of status quo, which means less work for me!

[Claudius]

I'm late to this discussion, and I don't think my opinion will be very popular, but if it depended on me, I would get rid of all the different subforums, and would have one forum for the entire family of 1d100 systems. Yes, one forum for BRP, RQ6, Legend, Openquest, etc. I would keep the Alastor's Skull Inn, Glorantha, and More Games forums separate, and that would be it.

[Jae]

The intent of the forums is a bit confusing to me.

First off, although I've played rpgs for 20+ years, I've only recently returned to rpging and so consider myself a newb. My attraction to D100 comes from fond memories of CoC, Stormbringer & Runequest. Moreover, I like that the system is rules light, realistic, tactical, hasn't changed much and is largely compatible within itself. The quality of the game system speaks volumes, but I didn't know which variant to invest my limited time into. I'd read reviews on rpg.net and elsewhere for many of the current games, but I wanted a sense of which is considered the best (very subjective I know), has the greatest support material and the most future in it before the dreaded (or sometimes welcomed) update.

I was so glad when I found BRP Central. Not only did it provide a great location for me to lurk and read up on opinions, but the pinned tabs provided great links to currently published material to help with the research and the decision. However, some things confused me.

It seemed that the forums were fiefdoms for their respective game and largely favored only currently compatible products and discussions. The excellent pinned tab of products, lists those that are of the current version. Curiously, there is no pinned tab for recommended and highly compatible products (not all, just most relevant) from earlier versions. Not only that but I wondered where to ask questions that were related to multiple systems (I chose the BRP forum in the end). The cross compatibility and backward compatibility that attracted me to d100 was not easy to find.

Right now, we are blessed with multiple versions of a great game. Having separate folders for each currently supported games makes sense (subject to them receiving enough individual traffic) as the variations in character generation, combat, magic systems and even genre necessitates. It also allows the publisher to communicate with its audience, which is another attractive quality of BRP Central.

However, imo there is a need to also show the cross and backward compatibility of the system and have a place where unbiased discussions and comparisons can take place. Treating BRP as a separate variation of the game alongside the others also makes sense to me, so I favor putting BRP (in the form of the BGB) there and having a separate, neutral d100 folder.

just a newbs 10c

[Jae]

Here is another possibility. (Ok, it's actually very similar to those already mentioned, but a teeney weeney bit different).

 

If people prefer to keep the name of this forum as Basic Roleplaying, then why not create that subfolder in the d100 and call it BGB or Big Gold Book or whatever. That way we have our central discussion area and the BRP/BGB discussions have their own separate forum.

 

Its late, I'm tired and this may not just be similar, it may be down right cloned. Apologies if it is.

[Trifletraxor]

It does make sense to have a main general forum and subforums for the different systems. Moving the Basic Roleplaying specific threads from this forum to another is however a major undertaking with 2,500 threads to check, something I currently don't have time for. So, currently this one is put in the "Someday/Maybe" category of stuff to do.

[Jae]

How about creating the BRP Big Gold Book forum (after all, was it not BRP Central that coined that name?), add a couple of pinned notices in each forum advising that from this moment on, it is advised that general questions go here and specific questions relating to the BGB and its mongraphs go there. Add an additional notice that when time permits, maybe (maybe not) some of the older articles will be migrated.

 

Would that not satisfy the desire to split the groups without the admin burden falling on you?