TrippyHippy

There was a topic below about replacing the absent Stormbringer with something, which my gut feeling was "You can't substitute Stormbringer with anything else". Nevertheless, somebody made a suggestion for adapting Frank Herbert's Dune. For me, if there is one big licence that could be adapted for roleplaying still, it's Dune. It has been done before - Dune - Chronicles of the Imperium was a very limited released for Last Unicorn Games, just after they were bought out by Wizards of the Coast. The licence was lost shortly after, and to be sure it had been delayed for a long while previously due to (generally undisclosed) complications with the Frank Herbert estate. It was OK. Visually impressive with some good writing and conceptualisation, but the D6-dicepool based system (previously used in LUG's Star Trek series) was a bit fiddly in parts and probably wouldn't cut the mustard in today's market. The game was also a little incomplete, with multiple references to upcoming supplements that, of course, never happened. All said and done though, it showed the game could work. BRP (or some derivative) would also work well with Dune, because the skill basis along with set career choicesand/or personalty mechanics would easily incorporate any of the lifelong disciplines that define characters in the Dune narrative. Basically, there is the right blend of gritty realism, flexibility and narrative flavour that can be drawn into a BRP character that would suit. I'd also argue that Dune itself is the sort of setting that has the intellectual and engaging depth that would stand alongside other titles like RuneQuest and Call of Cthulhu well, while also being a distinct flavour of it's own. However, could Chaosium or any other RPG company actually afford it? The previous attempt, noted above, ran into problems for sure and it is a big licence which could include all sorts of complications. There is a new movie, or set of movies, mooted to be released in the next year or two, dorected by Denis Villeneuvre (who also directed the Arrival, Sicario and Bladeruner 2049 movies). I reckon that this could be a major hit, because the director is a rising star and good choice for the material, and especially if the Star Wars franchise continues to melt down as it has recently. It may be a licence that is too big to hold for a small company. Thoughts, anyone?

While this may be undoubtedly true, it could be put to the test by a well orchestrated Kickstarter campaign. I'm critical of Kickstarter, having been burned a number of times, but this sort of thing is pretty much what it is designed to do. If some raises, say, $200,000 then maybe those fans who back it could get a spectacular book. If it only raises $200, however, the game won't fund and nobody loses out too much.

To be honest, I'm not sure that there really is a substitute for a full Stormbringer RPG. Trying to adapt another writer's work is noble thing to do, but it's own thing. If people want to make another Stormbringer game, then they should bite the bullet, build bridges with Moorecock and get developing on the project. If Moorecock says 'no', then I guess that is that - but people would at least be clear on the matter. A fully colour, fully developed Michael Moorecock's Stormbringer game - or series of games set in the Multiverse - ought to be somebody's Holy Grail still.

The Worlds of Phillip K. Dick. Irvine Welsh's Trainspotting. Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction. Dante's Inferno. Blake Butler's Nothing. Howzat?

Actually, given the policy of making self contained games rather than generic systems, does the system even need a name? While the name 'BRP' eventually stuck with all RuneQuest derived games, they didn't necessarily label themselves as such until it was considered a brand for marketing reasons. If you make a game - say for the argument a new version of SuperWorld using something akin to HeroQuest rules - do you actually need to refer to the rules as a brand? Can you not just refer to them as the rules of that particular game?

Well, I bought it in a heart beat and it looks amazing, but it's a bit soon for me to write a review! I'll get back to you in about a year and a half of continuous play.....

The Heroes' Journey?

I think the major thing you may miss out on is the sense of an internal family warfare. The Amber Diceless system uses ranking not only ingeneral play, but also as part of the character generating auction. When somebody makes a bid to be best, they are the best and consequently the auction starts setting up little conflicts and tension amongst the players.

1st July? Probably 2nd July in NZ - but on waiting on edge, actually!

I think other people have answered the core questions very well, and the big appeal is definitely the authenticity and frankly hard core research that really brings the Authurian setting to life. It suits long term campaigns best, although it is easy enough to run as a one shot knightly quest, etc. It can be as historic or fantastic as the remits of the source material allows. The only thing I would add extra is that, mechanically, it really is the most polished and elegant version of the BRP rules that I have seen. It is streamlined - less skills, less stipulations in combat, less Characteristics, more focussed exclusively on Knights, less variation in die-types - just D20 and D6s, and lots of other ways too - but still feels very 'realistic' in play. Combat is brutal, but dynamic and fast. There isn't a magic system, per se (apart from in the 4th edition), but the philosophies and paradigms of magic are very well explained, which makes it pretty easy for a referee to create the right atmosphere in a game. In short, it is a gem.

Actually, different feilds of science can be studied in quite different ways - and consequently the skill sets are quite different. If you study Physics, for example, much of the research is based on calculus, whereas in Biology you tend to rely on statistics. I've seen Physics teachers all at sea when analysing biological data and vice versa. In the case of an Anthropologist, which is a good profession for a CoC character, I would suggest that they would be well read in History and Religion, with plenty of Library Use and Language skills. The scientific angle would be through Psychology, mainly, although they could have a smattering of other disciplines in there. From the standard CoC Professions, a Professor is obvious, but maybe an Author would work too.

The Stormbringer rules of 1989 were different to those of Elric! and, following on, Magic World though.

Well, it's not something he would necessarily disclose or discuss. He was certainly aware of the RPG hobby though.

I'm not sure, given the legendary amount of drugs they were consuming, that they were aware of anything much!

BRP is not a rules light system. It's a rules medium system that you can adjust to fit a particular genre or approach, and is straightforward enough - but it isn't rules light. Ghostbusters is rules light - you can summarise that on a page.

I'd be very interested in a Supers version of these rules, as I think the scaling nature of them are practically purpose built and I prefer having the genre represented by words (rather than just numbers) in this way too. I am curious over the title you would use for the OGL version of the system - and I shall wait and see what you come up with. As somebody has mentioned, 'Hero' has been taken. Maybe do the old use of alliteration: "Heroes & Heroines"?

That's a method I've seen with Traveller - and it is the best system I use for that system. It could work for RuneQuest too - as it's a combination of random and point allocation in effect. It's also quicker than points spend on it's own because you just have to choose the dice rolled, rather than um and ah for ages over individual points allocation. I like it. As an amendment, you could have 21 dice rolled and then allow two of the results to be automatically changed to 6s. This would be the equivalent to the two 2D6+6 scores, but you get a bit more flexibility in the way you allocate (although you'd still have to keep the 8 minimum for SIZ and INT) while also picking off a couple of bad rolls (the 1s for the most part).

Well, we had a D&D player once who turned up with a character he had claimed to roll the stats for. They were 18, 18, 18, 18, 17, 18. He was happy. Is this a lesson we all need to learn here....?

Divide 80 points among 7 stats - keep the scores within the respective dice ranges. Done.

Put it this way, in an interview about the ending of his Game of Thrones series, George RR Martin said: Now people can debate the exact definitions of various fantasy categorisations, but all that really just boils down to semantics in the end. The real point, however, is that it is simply a misrepresentation of Lord of the Rings to suggest it is shiny and hopeful. It isn't.

Exactly that - the idea being that we should tolerate the selfish and wicked, like Gollum, because their obsessive greed and blindness to others, leading to their own downfall essentially provides salvation to the rest of us. Lord of the Rings is a tragedy more than anything else, even in reference to the 'far shores' which a load of characters go on to at the end, which is also metaphor for death. The notion that the story is shiny and hopeful, is fundamentally misreading the themes.

It really wasn't. Lord of the Rings is hardcore dark fantasy - it's central theme is largely about death, as inspired by Tolkien's own experience in World War I and his own reflections of Wold War II. There is a central Christian-esque morality at play within the setting and characters, which contrasts with later fantasy creations, and reflects Tolkien's own conservative world views - but unlike The Hobbit, the story is not fully aimed at children nor is it a lighthearted romp. Characters die and suffer in LotR.

Fair enough.

Moorcock was the editor for New Worlds magazine for decades. Not only is he regarded as a major fantasy writer in his now right (he's ranked in the top 50 of UK writers of all time), he is also one of the most authoritative academics of the fantasy genre. To suggest that he had a cursory reading of Tolkien is silly - he actually met Tolkien in person - he's the sort of guy that could present lectures on the subject. Just because he doesn't like Tolkien's work - the reasons of which are well detailed in multiple articles and essays - doesn't mean he hadn't read them in any detail. Quite the opposite in fact.

Y'know when people complain about 'identity politics' and that there is too much politics entering into our general, everyday discourse, when we could be discussing all sorts of topics in much less adversarial ways...there's this....