Atgxtg

Consing how often we disagree it's amazing how much we tend to agree on things. My view exactly. I've got RQ2, RQ3, most of the RQ supplements, WoW, CoC, Stormbringer, Elric and possibly ElfQuest kicking around. The BRP core rules doesn't change anything as far as my gaming goes. Yeah there are a few new wrinkles, but frankly, I wouldn't use most of them.

That's good. THe more stuff that hits the stores, the better off BRP will be.

Once again it is worth mentioning that someone cannot copyright a system. So it is perfectly legal under US copyright laws (and apparently UK laws too) to write/create a system with game mechanics virtually identical to BRP-or any other RPG for that matter. So if someone wanted to make a RPG that was BRP compatible they could. The might have to avoid using a few terms but otherwise have few restrictions. Way back in the old days that Nick mentioned, there were quite a few companies that made unofficial D&D and AD&D products. TSR did go after some of them, and eventually most 3rd party D&D products stopped using the D&D logo, and changed a few terms (Armor Class to Armor Rating, Hit Points to Hits to Kill, etc.) and were fine. Things were a lot friendly back then between game designs, too. Lots more give and take and exchanging of ideas and much less worry about legal status.

Where do you get that from? The law is the law regardless of language. If Mongoose gives permission to use something as open content, it is still open content in another language. Now national borders is something else again, but then Mongoose would have had to copyright BRP in a country before they would have the right to persecute anyone there. It would be a bad business move on their part to prosecute someone for translating the SRD, anyway. Ultimately it increases their marketshare.

Which requires someone to not only visit the Chaosium website but requires as well. That's a wonderful of ensuring that the game doesn't attract any new players.

I'm pleased that it sold well. I'm not pleased about how Chaosium has chose to support BRP. Monographs aren't going make the game more popular. I agree that the BRP book isn't very beginner friendly. That's to be expected when it covers so much ground. It is a useful tool for a GM who wants to craft a campaign setting, but since most GMS use per-established settings and pre-written adventures, I doubt BRP will connect with beginners. A 4-6 page or so intro would help (it will probably take a page or the character sheet, and another page or two for weapon, armor and resistance tables). In some ways, the modular nature of the book and all the options makes it tougher to teach, as each GM will select different options to use. Indeed, some might consider some options to be standard and treat some of the new standard rules as options.

Even that isn't quite so cut & dried. All those "original" spells were named after the characters/ and/or players of the old campaigns, or in reference to real people. So any legal action taken would open a who can of worms. For example, did Dave Hargrave get (or need) permission to name an spell in Arduin after Greg Stafford? Actually the leased Glorantha, but that was in addition to the RQ license-not part of it. I believe Greg/Issaries own RQ and Glornatha.

Yeah, I remember, pretty much just like it is now. Don't you remember what it was like is the bright days when RQ was being supported? When Chaosium was releasing several quality products each year? That was a golden age. A re-hash of a 30 year olfdrule set, with poor support isn't anything to excite me. It's not the new golden age, is more of the same Dark Age that we've been in. Even Stormbringer gets a new edition every so often before fading back into the woodwork. I'll start thinking Golden Age when I actually see some BRP products on the shelf somewhere. If anything the current state of this shows just how bad off Chaosium is. It's like going to a funeral and noting how well the deceased looked. The system is no more alive now that it was 5 years ago. Probably over 95% of BRPs sales were to people who already owned one or more version of the core system. Look at the forum. The overwhelming majority here are those who were familiar with the system long before BRP was mentioned. Do you think that's a good thing? I don't. When BRP starts selling others and begins drawing in some new players, then we'd have something to be excited about.

It's kind of difficult to get excited about a system that most of us have already owned for over two decades. Sure BRP throws a few new twists and wrinkles on the underlying system, and turns it into a toolkit, but there are few surprises in the book for us "d100 die-hards" to get excited about. Not that this is intended to be negative criticism about BRP or anything. It's what it was supposed to be, an attempt to put the various d100 game mechanics, variants, and options into a single package. It's kind of like the wheel. No one gets excited about the wheel itself, but with how the wheel gets used to make other things. With BRP, there haven't been many applications that have used it for us to get excited about.

No, skill names are fairly open. After all, RPGs didn't invent riding, first aid, or archery, they just took real skills and gave them game equivalents. Likewise with spells (you can't copyright lightning any more than you can copyright the sun). The same holds true to characteristics/attributes. Otherwise RQ would have gotten into problems by "Swiping" STR, CON, INT, DEX and CHA. By as those terms were already qualities used to describe people before there were RPGs, they are fair game.

The bought the name-not the system. Mongoose was quite plain about that on their forums. Anybody can use a game system, provided that you don't use and system specific setting, creatures, or terms.

Since RPGs tend to build upon their predecessors, it would be difficult (if not impossible) for most RPG companies to exist if companies could copyright RPG game mechanics. Think about it. As much as we like the old CHaosium products, they built upon earily RPGs, such as D&D. Things like rolling up 3D6 for attributes, hits points, weapon damage dice and other all were orginaled in D&D. Even the typical RPG dice (d4, D8, D10, D12, D20 and yes D100), were first created for D&D.

Mongoose sort of let the cat out of the bag when they were talking about MRQI. When people asked how they could base MRQ on the RQ system, since they only licensed the RQ name, Mongoose noted that you cannot copyright a rules system, just specific settings. creatures and such. So there is nothing to prevent someone from practically copying BRP or MRQ verbatim, as long as they don't use copyrighted terms or settings. That is the reason why WotC "allowed" retro-clones of D&D. They didn't have a legal leg to stand on. Now how people view this morally is another matter.

I think a multi-world idea is interesting, but not really a shared world concept. Much like Worlds of Wonder, it is multiple, separate settings that characters can somehow move through. Not much to share there. It could just as easily be several separate setting that have nothing to do with each other that a GM could link (magically or otherwise) for his own campaign. I think that in order for the shared world(s) concept to really work, it must be more of a group effort rather than each author creating his own world. It needs some overarching theme to keep it one setting.

Sadly, no. Nice to know someone gets enjoyment from it. Who knows, maybe somewhere, sometime, somebody was sitting at a keyboard just about the slit their wrists when they say one of my typos and laughed to hard they dropped the knife. Hey, it could happen.

Personally I don't consider myself a BRP grognard, but an RQ grognard (meaning RQ, not MRQ). While it's nice to see Chaosium put something out other than CoC, I'd prefer to play/run RQ, Stormbringer or Superworld rather than BRP. I'm not sure I consider BRP (or even RQ2/3) "the fairest in the land", either. Practically all the features that I liked about RQ have been incorporated into other RPGs--even the RQ setting, Glorantha. Many of the elements that made RQ so enticing (skill based characters, a richly detailed setting, campaign settings rather than adventure modules, an overarching story) are now common to many RPGs. I doubt that we'll get much of a consensus on why people like BRP either. Since there are so many variants of the RQ rules (Stormbringer, Call of Cthulhu, Worlds Of Wonder, Elric, Superworld, Ringworld), the fanbase is really several different groups who each prefer one version or another. Hence the various debates over things like hit locations, Strike Ranks, skill category modifiers, fatigue rules, skill checks, movement, the Resistance, Table, and such. Probably anything (and everything) that one fan liked about one version of BRP is something that another fan hated and a reason why the preferred a different version of the rules. For example, I for one, don't care much for Call of Cthulhu, finding the mechanics poor, and the campaign setting pointless. Lovecraft's theme of creatures far more powerful than man; that man is helpless against, strikes me as the worst possible setting for a RPG possible. Yet, others adore the game, and it has been Chaosium's lifeblood for two decades.

One of my favorite bits about BRP, although one that isn't popular with everyone is the "skill check" experience system. Back when the AD&D group had to wait while the GM tallied up the XP and work out the award per character, skill checks were much easier and faster. Another bit was that is was more "gritty/re;asotoc" than most of it's competitiors. Yet another was that since it used a fixed HP system, it was possible to mix 'n match characters of different power levels. Now, many of the features that made BRP (well actually RQ) popular in the past are now standard in other RPGs. Back in 1980 it was hard to find a fantasy RPG that did use character classes and levels.

That is probably the biggest obstacle to the success of any RPG. Support. Some any good concepts and games have fallen to the wayside because they failed to be supported with additional products in a timely fashion. BRP isn't so much a universal system adaptable to any setting as a toolkit system that lacks any genre. It also lacks some of the tools it needs for certain genres (particular Sci-Fi). It makes a decent toolkit for a experienced GM with a clear idea of the sort of campaign he wants to create, but isn't much help to a fledging GM or one used to running in a pre-existing setting. It really needs some sort of "out of the box" campaign setting and adventures to help out a beginning GM. Yeah, many of us don't need that kind of stuff, but then we have a higher percentage of RPG authors and publishers active in this forum than is typical among the gaming community.

How is the new policy going to affect your future products?

One thing that might be of interest is the relative lack of standardization among early firearms. No only were there various calibers for muskets, but most parts were not interchangeable between guns-even the same model. The tolerances used in manufacturing at the time meant that each weapon was really a custom job. There is a case in the 1800s where one of the arms manufacturers produces a small batch (five I believe) of rifles that with fully interchangeable parts in order to impress the US Army and secure a government contract. The rifles were meticulously hand crafted. None of the other thousands of that model rifle that were produced were fully interchangeable-just those five.

It would kinda suck if you happened to have a warehouse full of books printed with the RQ logo on them.

In my defense, I'd like to mention that constantly switching keyboards from US layout to Japanese layout might be partially responsible for some of my typos. But only some. But I glad that my errors bring you so much happiness.

Well, there was that rough draft that I sent you to look over two years ago. Did you ever read it?

Rosen, Despire what Matt Sprange has made clear, what does the MRQ OGL licence actually state? I recall when OGL D&D came out and evenyone when OGL happy, I raised the thought of companies "pulling theplug" on OGL someone down the road, and everyone said that the companies couldn't do that because of the OGL license. Since OGL MRQ is mostly copied from OGL D&D, wouldn't the same conditions apply? If so, you should be able to print to your hearts content under the OGL license. If not, don't ever print anything for a Mongoose Product again. Ever. It's pretty obvious that the only benefit to pulling the licenses is to wipe out any third party companies. So why help them to cut your own throat? If I were running a company with a bunch of OGL MRQ stuff, I'd have a lawyer check out the fine print and see just what you are actually entitled to do.

I don't hold the crown. That belongs to someone I used to game with who, when making his own character sheets, wrote down Marital Arts instead of Martial Arts. How I regret that I was not the first to proofread that character sheet.