Nakana

I just want to emphasize that Chaosium to my knowledge has never actively solicited, expected, or relied on “free labor” from the community. 

It is a willingly offered volunteer service in hopes of them making a better product.

It is essentially customers saying “I found a mistake, please fix this” and I think the community at large appreciates Chaosium’s responsiveness and acceptance in the process. There is no confusion or expectation of being paid or credited for doing so.

We, the customers, are going to do this anyway. At least Chaosium funnels this feedback into one thread so each detail can be noted and tracked. How many other big publishers do this?

If it bothers you to not be paid or credited for pointing out an error, simply choose not to do so. 

I don’t like the picture being painted that Chaosium is exploiting its customers for free labor. That simply isn’t happening. 

To solidify my point:

A customer pointed out that the font size in a section of text in the pdf is really small and hard to read. 

Chaosium has already replied that they will change this to make it easier to read before going to print. 

That’s just fantastic customer service is what that is. 

16 minutes ago, Jason D said:

I didn't add more magic or powers, as we had a mandate to make what was there better and clearer/cleaner, not add a bunch of new stuff just to add new stuff. 

First, fantastic job on a phenomenal product! I was afraid certain things might be stripped out, but it all looks to be there! 👏👏👏

Second, as to your quote and regarding adding stuff... might BRP Platinum (that's what I'm now calling this) get a secondary volume that BRP Gold teased about?

49 minutes ago, TheophilusCarter said:

BRP BPB?!  😄

Now that there will be two of them the “Big Book” part is redundant. I propose moving forward we reference them as BRP: Gold and BRP:Platinum 

FYI I'm coining the phrase:

BRP: Platinum 

Please let that catch on! 

Given that the BGB was just on sale for a $1 at DTRPG I wouldn’t expect to get the new book as an update. 
 

Curious to know what the specifics will be for the pdf to physical book discount. Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t pdf files included with the purchase of a physical book on Chaosium’s site? 
 

This makes me think the price for the pdf in April won’t be “full price” of a book. 

I’d rather see the long awaited companion volume teased throughout the BGB. 

2 hours ago, Mugen said:

No, not at all.

I'm just suggesting that I would rather do (skill-20)/5 rather than (skill-50)/5, just to have fewer negative skills.

When I wrote "modifier", I meant "ability modifier".

Gotcha. Because of the Resistance table I view 50 as the equal point. So 50 = 0; 60 = +2; 40 = -2; etc. 

4 hours ago, Mugen said:

That's one way of doing it, but one that gives a majority of negative skills. D&D skills rarely go below 0, except if your modifier is negative.

I'd rather use a value that can be identified as a "complete newbie" as the 0, something between 15 and 25.

If I’m understanding you correctly (referring to skills less than 50%) I would simply not have modifiers rather than having negative modifiers. So it would just be a d20 roll. 
 

I also know that I’m playing fast and loose with the conversion, but after all these years of playing I prefer to keep the crunch loose rather than getting bogged down by it. 

My conversion for d% to d20 skills is:

(% Skill - 50)/5 round down = modifier

d20 roll = d20 + modifier 

so a skill of 70% = +4 modifier

d20+4 (roll high) against DC

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

combat is tricky because armor absorption vs armor class doesn’t translate well so just calculate AC based on whatever dnd edition you like 

1 hour ago, JonL said:

...in order to successfully follow the license.

Is anyone planning to? (Sincere question)

24 minutes ago, dvdmacateer said:

The title of the thread is "Announcing the Basic Roleplaying System Reference Document and Open Game License" so home brewing and  or not publishing under the BRP logo is  irrelevant.

I think you missed my point entirely. 👍

Edit: Just so snark isn't feeding snark, let me elaborate. 

Mechanic: Roll [x] dice against [y] skill; result +/- point pool. 

Terse Language: Roll 2d10 against Mental Coping skill. If success, Mental Health is unaffected. If failure, deduct 1d4 from Mental Health. 

If I want to publish a work, I can use whatever mechanic I want. I cannot use same or very similar language as something else (copyright). 

If I want to publish a work under the BRP license, I can still use whatever mechanic I want. I cannot use language that is not "substantially different" from prohibited content per the t&c's of the license. 

In the above example I could publish my own work, but not under the license. 

5 hours ago, dvdmacateer said:

You can't the mechanic would have to be "substantively different". You can't have a mechanic which measures a person's mood/thinking/behavior  by rolling against a a stat or ability and depending on result you lose a variable  number of points in a pool? 

Sure you can! I do it all the time. In fact, that is the exact same mechanic used for hit points, magic points, etc. The mechanic itself is not protectable, however the language describing how it is used is. 

So if the language you are using to describe the mechanic is not "substantially different" from "Sanity", it may violate the t&c's of the license, in which case just don't use the license and do what you want. 

If you are actually using the same or very similar language to describe the mechanic, that would be copyright infringement (don't do this).  

My ultimate point is I think it would better serve Chaosium to not exclude [whatever] and instead allow [whatever] with a certain caveat of proper citing/accreditation. It would make the license less restrictive, show trust, and I think it would increase the adoption rate of the license. Again, just make BGB = SRD. 

If Chaosium really wanted to pull a brilliant move, they would revise the BGB, maybe slim it down a little, remove anything they want to protect as IP (Sanity, etc.) and release the entire thing as the official SRD. Given that it's a toolkit in nature anyway, it makes sense. They could even sell a printed version of it which might spark new interest in the universal BRP system. Maybe even god forbid work on the long-awaited phantom follow up volume as an extension.

As for prohibited content, (i.e. Sanity) I don't see what the big deal is really. You can have the exact same mechanic and call it by any other name: Reality Check, Mental Health/Stability, Coping Ability, etc. I think it would be awesome to say "have at it!" with the caveat of properly citing certain content. So you could totally use "Sanity" as long as you cite the origination of the mechanic as being from "Call of Cthulhu published by Chaosium" or whatever.  

But then again it's Wednesday and I'm prone to reckless abandon on Wednesdays. 

Alright this seems promising.

Full disclosure: when it comes to works that are out of print and either too expensive or simply not for sale legally anywhere the temptation to download and use those illegal PDFs is high. 

've seen those PDFs of Worlds of Wonder.  They are not high quality and parts of the original Magic World are simply missing. 

I would much rather have a high quality and legal PDF. 

If this can be somewhat of a loyal fan team effort then @Vile I can take your scans and do the rest of the work. (Full text file and high quality imagery). 

@Rick Meints would you have a problem with this?

I fully understand that I am part of a very small and overall unprofitable club for the company to cater to. That being said this news confirms that there are no known products on the horizon that I am interesting in buying. (Was holding out for BRPE)

The only other thing I'd be interested in is World of Wonders, in any possible format (pdf, POD, reprinted new edition, etc.)

The only copies I can find for sale are around $100. Alternatively if anyone is interested in selling me their copy at a reasonable price please contact me. 

Yep.

To paraphrase someone else "Magic World is Stormbringer with all the Morcockisms stripped out."

Personally I'd call that a feature. 

If I recall correctly it seems that trying to work with Morcock and using his IP proved to be a major headache for Chaosium. 

Still, if the plan is to bring Stormbringer back, the first step would be to remove/de-emphasize MW. 

I agree that the Stormbringer brand is more marketable than generic MW, however. 

Still hoping for that Worlds of Wonder reissue. 

@MOB  Thank you for such prompt replies. It's good to see that coming from Chaosium.     

I suppose I'll try to get in touch with the authors to find out their plans on said material. 

It's good to know the piece on religion will be available in some way. I'll keep my eye out for that. 

Otherwise I'm mostly interested in expanded allegiances and all the material about the Southern Reaches. 

To me this is like a repeat of the Nentir Vale Gazeteer. 

Ah, I was under the impression that Chronicler's Companion was to be an official Chaosium product  and Chaosium owned the rights to it. Am I correct to understand the rights will now belong solely to the author who will have the opportunity to release the material how they see fit? Either as a licensed product of their own or as fan fiction?

If CC wasn't written by Chaosium or an employee, who was the author(s)?

Any chance Chaosium would be willing to release the "Chronicler's Companion" (as is) as a consolation prize? 

I realize it isn't a finished product; I don't care. I've been waiting two years for it. Seems like a waste to just never release it or rework it for some other product line. It was written for Magic World and the Southern Reaches. 

It would really be awesome if Chaosium made it available to Magic World fans somehow. 

Logistics-wise: I get it. They are doing the right thing.

Business-wise: I'll admit that I see the logic in what they're doing and acknowledge as a company strategy they are probably making the right move (even though it isn't what I had wished.)

I was simply whining about the lack of communication skills. Why not spend 30 minutes to an hour laying out a "roadmap" that actually answers the questions they have answers for and be honest about the questions they don't have answers for? Then post said "roadmap" on their website. I (and this is only my opinion) think that what has been executed on the communications front is largely responsible for a lot of the (unnecessary) confusion and frustration that many people have expressed (about what little info they have to go on) regarding the decisions that have been made (even if for the right reasons.)

I would agree with you completely if that was what they actually did. But it's not. What they did was this:

"We're only going to focus on the kickstarter. The kickstarter is the priority. We don't know what we're going to do with these specific product lines that already exist; until the kickstarter is completed they are not a priority. But oh wait, even though we haven't fulfilled the kickstarter yet, we're going to create and introduce these all new product lines that no one has been asking for! As far as the product lines you HAVE been asking for? Well... that is not a priority right now... "

Don't feel told off. To get straight to the point of it, it took you a minute and a half to type and send that question and you're right, it took them an equal amount or less time to send the reply. The problem is that for you it only took a minute and a half whereas they have had to answer that same question in multiple places. (1:30 x amount they've had to answer same question = a lot of time on the same question for them)

But, it's not your fault. The problem is they still lack clear communication, obviously due to the fact that they don't want to spell out just how bad things are and/or piss off/lose customers. 

They have a website at their disposal yet the bulk of info is scattered throughout various forums or blogs. What they do post on their website is vague and raises more questions than it answers. 

When it comes to Magic World either they don't mention it all or simply say "it's not a priority right now". What they should say is "It's dead in the water until we know we can survive this Kickstarter fiasco, otherwise what's the point?" And they should say that on their own website. 

The Kickstarter should be the priority. Focus on fulfilling obligations to customers that have already bought products, not planning some weak rewrite of BRB NOT based on the BGB.

Edit: Ok, my last sentence is a bit "catty". I won't delete it, but I do retract it. However, I stand by my statements regarding the current method of communication.

Hey guys, my apologies for my absence. Work has become unbelievably busy; I'm juggling about 6 major projects all at once all of a sudden. 

I don't want this project to die, but to be honest I may not be able to do anything for a few more weeks. Please bear with me. =\

Sorry for the delay guys. Maps are almost done. (Unexpected job that I couldn't afford to let pass by)

All "standard" rpg races are welcome. However, don't feel tied down by the "standard" stereotypes. 

tooley1chris, let me review the KMT. I was thinking at some point using rules from RuneQuest Empires to have a mini game, but this might be better as everyone has access to it.