jp42

RQ6 has a chaos creature called a Boar Man that might be useful to you.

Status is actually the first thing that I change about bare-bones BRP when I'm putting together a campaign. It rubs me the wrong way that Status is the only "skill" that isn't actually a skill. So I promote it to Social Standing, and I make it a Characteristic alongside strength and dexterity. If I need a roll, Status is computed from SOCx5. I still use it in many of the same ways, but I don't like the idea of it being the only non-skill in the skill system.

So, regardless of how one feels about advantages and disadvantages, edges and flaws, talents and complications - whatever you want to call them - is there anything approaching a consensus on how to balance them against one another, and perhaps even against attributes and skills? And not just superhuman gifts (covered in Superworld and BRP) or magic (covered all over the place, but rarely balanced against other skills) but even normal traits like ambidexterity, eagle eyes, hard of hearing or vow of poverty?

If you do, you may want to look at the GURPS: Powers - Psionic Powers PDF as well. A well-worked example of how to do psionics with GURPS 4th edition.

I'm a fan of most of the magic systems. I loved spirit magic in RQ back in the old days, really liked but didn't fully understand sorcery in RQ3, and am fond of both the individual spell as skill model and the distinct sorcery from BRP. I think I'd be inclined to use them all, sprinkled throughout the setting.

But what to do if you're also a fan of RQ3/BRPs more finely grained skill system? Just double the number of Improvement Rolls?

Many games that are otherwise quite detailed in their rules have features that many GMs either read and don't remember, or read and don't really feel comfortable implementing. Even GURPS is quite explicit that when you're not under any stress, most tasks you're trying get a +10, so even a character whose skill might warrant a 10- on 3d6 has a nearly 100% chance of avoiding failure under normal circumstances. You get the same result from the "don't make them roll for something if it doesn't matter" rules that many games have anymore. Though, to be fair, if you know it doesn't matter as a GM, you might still make them roll just to keep the tension high and avoid giving away anything you didn't intend to give away.

I would agree with the assessment that Savage Worlds occupies the same space as BRP. I tend to recommend them to many of the same audiences. My own tastes run more to BRP, as I find the dice mechanics, plus the use of playing cards and other variants on randomization, to be clunky comparatively, and to have some quirks I'm not pleased with.

Especially PDFs, because you cut out the printing service entirely! No paper, no ink! Ought to be cheap as old chips.

The exact language: The semantics are odd - there doesn't appear to ever be any reason not to declare a parry before the attack roll is made, as there's no drawback if the parry proves not to be needed.

Prefacing this with the fact that I'm a fan of all three game systems, it was interesting to note that this year, neither Hero Games nor Steve Jackson Games won any ENnies - in fact, SJG wasn't even nominated (Hero had five nods). In the realm of small companies making generic systems, BRP and BRP-alike games seem to have done very well for themselves in this annual contest.

I suspect there's just too much reliance on the thought that "Illusion == Hologram" instead of allowing it the flexibility that it deserves. You can have an illusion of something *not* being there, for example.

Nice! I agree with most of your thoughts, Pansophy, it would need to be a "print" on demand style app, that generated a dynamic document based on the selected values. I suspect you're right that the layout issues alone would be a nightmare, without some pre-planning to make the various components into standard sizes and shapes to promote the modularity of the process. The elimination of art would go a long way to helping with the process - to create a purely functional document to supplement your core rules copy.

Perhaps it's different with a physical book, but with the PDF, all of the options, and all of the different locations of them, just becomes so tedious. It's not as bad as, say, GURPS with it's one hundred and eleven sourcebooks, but it would be lovely to just have all of the things that don't matter culled, and the things that do inserted where they belong.

In a perfect world, you'd open up an app - maybe a web app, maybe not - and you'd be presented with all of the modules and optional rules and alternate rules in the BGB. There you would check boxes next to the ones you wanted to use and leave the others unchecked. Some, mutually exclusive rules, would involve radio buttons instead of check boxes. Some would activate additional sub-rules that only pertained if the main rule was checked. And then you'd hit submit, and a custom BGB PDF would be produced with only those rules that you opted for presented, and presented in-line, like they weren't optional at all, but just the default rules. Somebody get on that, won't you?