DirkD

My version is nearly finished. I decided to expand it a little bit and explain a couple of choices. I will probably make a pdf out of it and put it in the download section. It should be ready tomorrow.

Has anyone actually posted a conversion method from MRQ to BRP? I made a table for skill-conversion and percentage adjustment, so that you can use the MRQ stats of NPCs without much thought (or at least the skills of the NPCs). If there is nothing better out there, I could post it.

Gurps Space 4e could be the thing you are looking for. Here is a review: RPGnet : Review of Gurps Space 4e "In sum, GS 3e was a gaming product, while GS 4e is almost more of a reference manual for someone wanting to write a hard SF novel, but is seriously lacking (almost totally lacking, in fact) in actual game material."

You don't need to buy the RQ-rules, the RQ-SRD is enough to look for something specific. In fact, it's the complete ruleset of RQ-deluxe - if you don't need stuff like graphics and examples... I don't think there should be any problem using RQ-settings and adventures for BRP, they are both skill-oriented and percentage-based. The rule details aren't that important if you are using background material, and you can always look in the srd if you have a question.

I made a pdf of the characters - if you don't mind, I could make it available in the download-section.

I like Welcome to the den of the Name Nerds - especially the sections of irish, scottish and welsh names. If you play in a setting that is inspired by one of that cultures it is a very good resource.

Now that we are talking sf-settings, does anyone know if someone made a source book or fan-product out of the (very cool) sixth sun-setting from the books of Thomas Harlan (House of Reeds, Wasteland of Flint)? I recently read the books and the background was so colourful and unique, I would love it as a rpg-setting.

I read the SOTC SRD and I like it very much. Very innovative - I have a faible for new developments in RPGs anyway (I am a big fan of "Sorcerer" and "Kill Puppies for Satan"...) and the examples for Harry Dresden look promising, too. It's probably not so easy to adapt FATE-rules to BRP, but it could be relatively easy to convert background material from SOTC or Dresden to BRP.

Interesting, I am not familiar with the Fate-System, but on first glance it looks like an easy, story-telling oriented system. I will probably check it out when it is finished.

A setting would be great, especially if Chaosium can find a book/TV/movie series that is popular and isn't used in RPGs yet. It is hard to compete with something that is developed for years like WoD if you want to establish a new setting. It's better to use something that is already there. For example, the urban fantasy-genre is popular in the book-market at the moment. Series that could work out as a setting are the Dresden-Files by Jim Butcher or the Sookie Stackhouse books by Charlaine Harris (especially if the True Blood-series on HBO is a success). It would be something original for BRP with a big fan-base and lots of background material for future source books.

Good choice from Chaosium, the big advantages of pdfs are features like c&p. Everyone (who really wants to) can disable the security features of pdfs anyway, so it's a good thing if they don't use that nonsense to begin with. Are the pdfs watermarked?

Very good, now there is really no reason not to participate;) I have an idea that I wanted to use for Shadowrun, but it would fit in any Modern/Urban Fantasy/Cyberpunk-setting. Maybe I'll give it a try (even though it is harder to make your writing sound effortless if you are not using your native language).

It certainly is a good way to get BRP starting and to get the community involved. The only thing I don't like is that every entry becomes property of Chaosium. If Chaosium isn't publishing them, the rights should go back to the author. Even if the adventure isn't good enough to get published, you should at least be able to make it available for download or offer it to another magazin/publisher. If someone invests the time to write a 5000-7000 word adventure, it shouldn't go to waste. If you understand German, there are some good articles in Anduin 94 (Anduin - Fanzine für phantastische Spiele) and the article "Abenteuerwerkstatt" (Abenteuerwerkstatt) that was also published in the envoyer magazine is very good. There was an article in signs & portents "how to write bulletproof adventures" that isn't quite as good, but offers some guidelines. A better and more detailed approach can be found at The Harrow: RPG Columns Generally, I would use an established structure for adventures of the genre. The typical Cthulhu-adventure has 3 parts for example: 1. Background/Motivation 2. Detecting 3. Description of a house(cave/village/...) where the showdown takes place and the heroes confront the bad guys. If you use the same structure, everyone knows what to expect and the adventure is easier to read.

I don't think that the world is waiting for a license from a bunch of forum-users. Why would anyone buy or make a product that is approved by some unknown people? The d20-logo is a success, because 3rd-party-producers can benefit from the marketing-machine and market-share of a big company. I seriously doubt that anyone would use it, if a couple of kids from ilovednd.com would have made it. It would be a good thing, if chaosium creates something similar, though. It would give the logo some meaning.

I don't really have a star wars brp-version, that was just an example (Wheel of Time and Star Wars are the only d20-games I own), but classical jedi/sith-powers like force lightning, battle meditation, telekinesis or farseeing are basically spells. I would generally treat all powers like spells with their own percantage, in the case of persuade - a spell that gives you a bonus on Persuade. SIZ=(Con+Str)/2 sounds good to me.

This is my (incomplete) version of a d20/brp conversion guideline. The focus is on converting statblocks (especially npcs) as easy as possible. Definitions =========== BRP Base Percentage of a Skill = BP D20 Skill Bonus = SB Ability Scores ============== Strength = Strength Dexterity = Dexterity Constitution = Constitution Size = the effects of Siz are part of Con in d20, I would either simply use Con, or use a formula that allows only a minor variation (like Siz = Con -3+1D6) Intelligence = Intelligence Power = Wisdom Appearance = Charisma Education = Intelligence + Wisdom / 2 Skills ====== In d20 you usually have a statblock that includes only the total-skill-bonus (at least for NPC). It would be a lot of work to look for all the boni that may be included (Attributes, Feats, class, synergy). I would take the SB as it is (just exclude potential magical boni) and convert it with the following formula: BRP Skill = BP + 4*SB for example: Appraise +7 = Appraise 43% (15+4*7), Bluff +7 = Fast Talk 33% (05+4*7), Diplomacy +16 = Persuade 79% (15+4*16) (the table with related brp and d20 skills isn't ready yet). That way you can ignore everything (except magic) that gives you skill boni because it is already included. Additionally you have converted the skills without ignoring the BRP-system-specific difficulty of a skill. And finally: it is so easy, that you are able to write a small program/or excel table, that does the complete skill conversion automatically without going into d20 rule details (and that would take some programming work). I know that the Attribute-boni to skills are still included and I would do it this way because a) it's easier, you often distribute skill points in d20 to get a certain bonus including attributes (and you would get weaker in the area in brp if you don't take that into account), and c) if you take only 4*SB (instead of 5*SB without boni) it doesn't make a lot of difference for the characters with better attributes. I think the resulting percentages (see example) are in an acceptable range, not too high for advanced characters and not too low for beginning characters. Some d20-skills may have the same converted BRP-skill (spot and search (d20) would both convert to Spot (BRp) for example). In that case I would use the skill with the higher SB as a base and add 1*SB from the lower skill. The formula would be: BRP Skill = BP + 4*SBhigh + 1*SBlow for example: Spot +10, Search +8 = Spot 73% (25+40+8) On the other hand, some d20-skills may convert into more than one brp- skill. If you think that would make them too powerful, you could use the following formula to make each brp skill a little weaker: BRP Skill = BP + 3*SB Languages: This is a little more difficult, in d20 it is assumed that you speak a language well, if you have the skill - so it is probably necessary to calculate Language (Other) in another way - maybe Edu*3 or something like that. Weapons ======= Same as skills, but you use the attack bonus of each weapon as a base for the calculation. The formula is: Weapon Skill = BP + 4*(attack bonus with weapon) for example: ranged+5 and Weapon Group Proficiency (blaster pistols) would convert to blaster pistol 40% (20+4*5) ===================================== = Example d20 (star wars)-statblock = ===================================== Male near-Human, Noble 2/Jedi Councilor 5; Init +1; Defense 18 (+7 class, +1 Dex); Spd 10m; VP/WP 49/14; Atk +5 melee (2d8+1/19-20, lightsaber) or +5 ranged; SQ Call in a favor, inspire confidence +l; SV Fort +6, Ref +6, Will +9; SZ M; FP 3; DSP 10; Rep 8; Str 13, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 14, Cha 15. Challenge Code: D. Equipment: Lightsaber, personal transport Skills: Appraise +7, Bluff +7, Computer Use +3, Diplomacy +16, Gather Information +9, Intimidate +7, Knowledge (Firrerre) +7, Knowledge (Jedi lore) +4, Knowledge (Sith lore) +6, Profession (merchant) +7, Read/Write Basic, Read/Write Firrerreo, Search +4, Sense Motive +9, Speak Basic, Speak Firrerreo. Force Skills: Affect Mind +10, Empathy +7, Force Grip +6, Force Stealth +7, Friendship +7, Move Object +7, See Force +8. Feats: Force-Sensitive, Sharp-Eyed, Trustworthy, Weapon Group Proficiency (blaster pistols, simple weapons). Force Feats: Alter, Control, Deflect Blasters, Sense. ======= = BRP = ======= Male near-Human, Noble/Jedi Councilor Str 13, Con 14, Siz 14, Int 14, Pow 14, Dex 13, App 15, Edu 14 HP 14, Move 10 Weapon: lightsaber 30%/30%, blaster pistol 40%, Grapple 45%, Brawl 45% Skills: Appraise 43%, Bargain 32%, Bluff 33%, Computer Use 12%, Etiquette 41%, Knowledge (Firrerre) 29%, Knowledge (Jedi lore) 17%, Knowledge (Sith lore) 25%, Language Basic 70%, Language Firrerreo 42%, Persuade 79%, Sense 46%, Spot 41% (Intimidate +7 - maybe a +7% bonus on persuasion) Force Skills: (can be converted as skills - BP 0% is assumed here) Affect Mind 40%, Empathy 28%, Force Grip 24%, Force Stealth 28%, Friendship 28%, Move Object 28%, See Force 32% Equipment: Lightsaber, personal transport ======= Not Converted everything star wars specific including Weapons; Feats: Force-Sensitive; Force Feats: Alter, Control, Deflect Blasters, Sense.

I understand that you want an easy system as a guideline and it could work pretty well for archetypes and low-level characters. Most of the data in a d20-stat-block can be converted straight forward, the only problems I see are skills, feats (abilities), spells and the attack boni. For skills I personally would prefer two tables. Table 1 contains the d20-skills and the corresponding brp-skills. Table 2 contains the total d20 skill bonus (including feats and boni) from 0-30 and the percantage in brp. That way you can look at your d20 stat block and have a result by looking in the tables without the need to calculate anything. Additionally you can ignore all feats that give you a bonus to skills. For weapons you can use a similar table, so that you can ignore feats that give attack boni. For the remaining feats it is a little more complicated - instead of endless descriptions of feat-conversions you can either make some examples for common feats like power attack or a general guideline that each feat should give the equivalent of a 5% skill bonus (or whatever seems appropriate). The spell-systems are different in a lot of d20 systems (you could use the skill conversion for star wars d20 for example). I think it would be best to just provide a table with the d20-level and corresponding brp-data like the number of spells, the total percentage to distribute on the spells and the max-percentage per spell.

There is nothing objective about a formula where the weight of the variables is chosen subjectively. It gives you to feel of something solid, but it is not. Of course it is harder to define the "punch" of a character in brp and the percentages may vary, but that is more an argument against a formula. The fighter was just an example - to make a good conversion, you have to look what defines a character and what makes him "tick". Then you look at your brp campaign (which will usually have a different power-level) and put the character in relation to similar characters in that environment. D&D and BRP are just to different to take the formula-approach, at least for me.

Trying to convert skills, abilities and feats from d20 to brp by a formula is pointless in my opinion. You can't really measure the power of a character that easily, especially if you combine the right feats with magical items and spells. The work that is necessary to make a list of bonusses for hundreds (or thousands if you use all the books) of feats isn't worth it. Converting characters is more an art than a science. I would look at the d20 character concept and transfer it to brp. That means a high level fighter who uses a longsword and spends nearly all of his feats to be better at combat would be something similar in brp. Just make a really good fighter and round him out with some background skills that seem to fit. It's faster and you get better results - the systems are too different for an 1:1 approach.

The statblock stands out from the other text pretty good if you use coloured rows in the tables (like in the examples) or instead put the tables in a colourbox. I wouldn't put the whole blocks in boxes though, it can lead to a couple of grey pages if you put a handfull of stats in a row. The stats are a little long for that. I don't know if people generally prefer the stats in the text or in an appendix. Both can be OK in my opinion. If you use pdfs, putting all the stats at the end has the advantage that they are better accessible after printing them. In Star Wars Saga, they put whole encounters including maps at the end of the scenario (you can download a free campaign at Star Wars Miniatures and Star Wars Roleplaying Game if you want to take a look). I kind of like it, it's good for reading the actual plot (no long stats and combat relevant descriptions to distract you) and having all the important stuff in one place at the gaming table. Especially with the long stats that are used in saga, brp and runequest. On the other hand, if you don't have graphics to structure and lighten up your text, the statblocks can "freshen up" the layout a little bit if you put them in the text.

I played around with the layout a little bit and made an example pdf (example.pdf if you want to take a look). It looks better to me if you use italic instead of uppercase for subcategories (like In Memory/In Grimoire...). I am not sure yet if it is better to use italic (example 2) or bold (example 3,4) in the tables, but it's probably good to use something.

If you use the Hit Locations like that they don't really cost any space. The first table is 7 rows, you can maybe trim it to 4 or 5 if you drop the locations, but that's about it. I tried it with the style that I use for the MRQ pdf and the table easily fits into one column of the 2-col layout. So there is no real need to get rid of the locations even if you are making documents.

Aha, I didn't know that you can't include html-code in this forum - good job, forget I said anything.

I like the statblock, but it would be better readable if the 2nd and 4th column of the first table would be set in a fixed width to insert some space and make it more readable. For example: <colgroup> <col> <col width="40"> <col> <col width="40"> <col> <col> </colgroup> Also another empty line after the weapon-table wouldn't be bad.