Atgxtg

It was the only WoW setting that I never ran. I pulled it out and looked at it the other day, and it turns out the game is actually better than I gave it credit for. With a little effort, it could be the foundation of a decent SF game.

They always were primaily a D&D company. But they were also one of the few (okay, okay really the only) 3rd party publishers for RQ2. Paul Jaquays has always been one of the more talented people in the RPG field. Strange that Kevein Siembada Palladium has done so much better than JG.

No, but that goes back aways. Probably to Prince Valiant. The story Greg gave in Prince Valiant was that some people stopped over (non gamers) and wanted something to do, said "Hey Greg, why don't we play one of your games?", and Greg had to say no, as it takes too long to learn enough BRP to be able to really play it to make it worthwhile as a pickup game. I think that the fundamental problem was that the guys who wrote MRQ were not RQ/BRP players. I mentioned that way back when on the Mongooose boards, and thus started the flame wars. Practically every change makes the game more like d20. If you have people used to writing D20 stuff work on an RPG, it is no surprise if it has a strong d20 feel to it.Take a look at magic. In RQ, everybody knew some magic, and usally had at least Heal 1 by the time they got through character generation (or spend tham money from the CHA loan). In MRQ only dedicated spellcasters start off with any magic, just like d20. Nothing Mongoose changed made RQ feel "less" like d20. I wound't say they were inexperienced, just that a lot of the experience wasn't applicable. Many RPGs were D&D derived, so if you are familiar with D&D, you have a grasp on how those game work. RQ was one of the exceptions. It is very alien in concept to D&D. THe playtest drafts did have some RQ savvy input, but it got dropped. D20 gamers tend to have different priorities than RQ gamers.

I heard that 4.0 (again, maybe it needs it's own thread) was going to be very similar to the new Star Wars rules. WotC is trying to simplify things as 3.5 got over complicated with all the tacked on stuff. Plus it give WOtC a chance to make some money selling the core books again. From what I hear the OGL has backfired on them a bit. They didn't wind up with the early 80s level of market share that they thought OGL would have provided. Between pdf and large 3rd party companies like Mongoose, the majority of d20 products are not produced by WotC.

THat's no nearly as bad as what Mayfair did to CHILL. Someone got the idea that it would be "cool" if the game looked like it was written by an inmate in a pscho ward. SO everything was written is some wacky scribble font, with erraqtic size, lettering and spacing. It might have looked cool and artsy, but made it a lot tougher to actually read the book. :mad:

Sorloc, I have and ran C&S (the original red book edition, no less with the 4 point text). While not a bad game, it was level based, and had increasing HP. Character creation was a nightmare. THe game used a d20 scale for stats (there were around a dozen or so), and players rolled a D20 for those stats. As bonuses and penalties for stats were large, it usually meant that any character tended to have at least one stat that was so low as to be crippling. I.e> mute, bedridden, pyschotic, etc. I think less than 10% of PCs managed to get through character generetion with something that was playable. My all time favorite was the character that someone rolled up with 20+ Str & DEX, great social status, horoscope the works. Everyone was getting excited about the guy, and he was looking like they were gonna adventure with their very own William Marshall, until we got to PYSCHE and it turned out that he was homicidal (the high social status meant more inbreeding), and went on rampages. I think he triggers were darkness and blood. Pendragon also gave a lot more info on actually role-playing in a fedual setting, although C&S certainly did more towards that end then any other RPG that had come out prior to it. Come to think of It, I think I have (or had) pretty much every one of the FGU games you mentioned. Flashing ABlades was probably my favorite of the lot. It even went out well with the local D&D players. THere were quite a few little companies that used rto produce good stuff back then. Most still exist in some sort of undead state. Judges Guild being another one, and one that would be of interest to RQ/BRP fans.

Yup. I still have that. It was also somewhat BRP derrived, although it had a horrible flaw with the parry rules (get your weapon speed up high enough and you don't need to make the parry roll).

Enpeze, I wasn't thinking of a rewrite so much as paragraph in the new/improved spot rules. Something like the SB5 brawling rules wouldn't be too bad. I think we are pretty much onthe same page. The important thing is to get BRP out of the shelves where gamers can see it. Then worry about alterations and upgrades. As for why MRQ came out the way it did, Well, I had heard from some people from the playtest groups as well as some Mongoose employees that the rules were much more BRPish up until the last draft, when Matt Sprange rewrote everything. I also heard that pretty much all the complaints about the system were pointed out by the playtesters, too. If you can mug a playtester and look at some of the playtest drafts you will see a RPG that looks a lot more familar. MOngoose orginally advertised the game as the return of RQ, and played up the involvement of Stafford and Perrin in the desgin on the new edition. I don't know why Stafford doesn't write anything for MRQ, or why Perrin left the playtest. But neither had a hand in design of the game as originally advertised. And yeah, you can tell what RPG system Matt is used to writing for. I think a LOT of the changes and problems weren't so much by design but fallout form removing all the checks and balances that the system had. Steve hid a lot of the plumbing for RQ away. Tweaking one part of he game almost always lead to unforeseen changes in how other aspects of the game played out. I think there is a point about dated RPGs. Chess did change an evolve over centuries. Newer RPGs often have new options and such that the designers of eariler games would have used if they had thought of it I seriously doubt we have all those neat polyhedrons to roll if Gygax and friends had ever though of using mutiple D6 the way Hero, GURPS or WEG did. Or an AC system, and increasing HP for that matter. BTW, Maybe the D&D thing should be spun off for it's own topic? There is certainly enough to say about it, especially with it's new RQ inspired skill system..

What? You didn't use FUTURE WORLD???!!:D:D Burn the heretic!

And now for something completely different, or the Pendragon threadjack. Badcat, You should give Pendragon a look. It is actually a vey good game, and has a few nice tweaks to the RQ system. I ran the game for years, to the point where I sort of had to beg the group to let me run something else. One really neat thing about the game was the time scale. With an average of one year per adventure, you got to play your character's sons as the campaign went on. It was sort of nice to know that when your character died, his magic sword would pass on to his son. The game plays very BRPish. Combat is probably closer to Stormbringer than RQ, with major wounds and such. Damage isn't based on weapon but by STR+SIZ and then modifed by weapon (sort of reverse RQ). Each character has a damage stat (in d6) equal to (STR+SIZ)/6. Then you add in the special effects for weapon type. Daggers do 1d6 less damage, greatswords +1d6 more, axes offset shields somewhat, and so on. If you like King Arthur, then definitely check out the Great Pendragon Campaign book. An over 400 page supplement for Pendragon that covers the timeline and gives you enough material to run a campaign. Sverre Pendragon uses a d20, but is not a d20 game in the "d20" sense. Although much of the design of d20 skill system was inspired" (swiped) by Pendragon and RQ (look at Jon Tweet comments about RuneQuest). Basically think RQ2, with it' s 5% skill increments. That is sort of the basis for Pendragon. Roll d20 under your skill and see if you succeed or not. The game even had check boxes to improve skills like RQ. Where Pendragon differs is in how it handles opposed rolls and criticals. Rather than a resistance chart, it is roll against ability. If both succeed, high roll wins. Combat is handled this way too, with the winner inflicting damage on the loser (the loser gets his shield protection if he rolled under his skill). Criticals were handled by rolling your skill exactly. A critical was considered to be a result of "20" and so wold beat a non critical. Very high scores (over 20) would add the amount over 20 to the roll, thereby greatly increasing the chances of a critical. Very different from D20, AC, levels and all that. Enpeze, I don't consider Pendragon to be BRP, but definitely BRP related. IMO closer to BRP than MRQ. But that's my slant. The Personality traits and Passion rules are also BRP related, but you have to hunt for the link. It hadl appeared in other RQ products, such as Thieves World, but using D100 instead of D20. Pendragon is most definitely Greg's baby. So much so that he just wrote a new edition last year. The Great Pendragon Campaign book is a fantastic supplement (think RQ campaign pack, but set to run for over 75 game years). In fact, this book was my RPG pick me up after MRQ. My local RPG shop owner was pleased that I liked it (I was quite happy forking over the $50 for this puppy. As a read alone is is something. Dozens of characters, scenarios, maps, history, equipment, cotes of arms, you name it). Okay, threadjack complete......(???)

Yup, that's the guy. Quite a few writers get their start in RPGs. Mike Stackpole, Raymond Benson, Timothy Zhan, the list goes on. Apparently both activities requires the same aptitudes (or tyhe same neuroses). Oh, and Williams was part of George R.R. Martin's RPG group that played Superworld, that led to the creation of the Wild Cards series of books. Pity the RPGbook for that went to GURPS.

Hey cat, The cool thing is, this isn't a vote. Just how "we" define BRP. That makes it entirely subjective. THat means we could pick anything from "serif fonts" to "Steve Perrin's name in the credits". IF we wanted to look at things logically, the I'd say we would have to go with picking those rules that have been every RQ/BRP game system. That would leave us with the attributes (if you count PENDRAGON drop INT), skill based task resolution, common die roll for conducting actions, and so forth (i.e. rsistance table, base skill percentages, classless, and oh yeah, skill checks ). PENDRAGON does a few things differently, such as D20 instead of D100, and no resistance chart (but an opposed resolution system that mirrors the resitance chart to some degree, and in some ways improves upon it).

I'm sorry too. While I wasn't bashing Mongoose with that post, I did sorta take a shot at you. Sorry. But, look on the bright side, getting into an argument with me sees to be thge new "rite of passage" for RQ/BRP players. Considered yourself initiated. You can now learn cult battle magic for half price and sacrifice for one-use rune magic. And... ...I WANT CAMPAIGN PACKS!!!! :D:D

Enpeze, I see your point about D&D being the gaming fro the masses. I do not entirely agree with it though. Over the years, most of my gaming groups have been comprised of "reformed" D&Ders. While a good percentage of thsoe player never "got" systems like RQ/BRP, others did. Quite a few players did get into things once they started to realize the differences and what sort of new options that were available. So I think is isn't so much, "what the masses want", but "what the masses have been taught to expect". IMO similar to the situation with AOL.

True. But one problem with Mongoose's variant was the reason why they made changes. Way back, when the game wasn't out and most of us were art the site asking questions, I used to ask, over and over, "why did they change that?" The answer I kept getting was "You didn't expect a new edition wouldn't have changes did you? Of course there were going to be changes." And that was the problem. In the past, changes to BRP were for a game specfic reason. Either to fix or improve a rule, or to have BRP fit a certain setting, or even to simplify the rules so they didn't have to reprint the entire RQ2 book. Mongoose changed things just to change things, and make sure that their game was differnt that previous editions of RQ. So I think it is possible to imrpove BRP, but it isn't easy. Changes have to aim at improving the game in some way, elimintating flaws and so forth. Since BRP is a pretty good system (in our eyes, anyway) there are not as many flaws to address.

I diagree. Not that we need a clunky version, but the current way BRP handles unarmed combat is ludicrous. A guy with an 17 STR and SIZ should not throw punches with the same effect as a strike from a light mace. For supers, something like this is vital. That was probably Palldium's biggest weakness with their Supers game. Most "heroes" ended up being serial killers. But, keep in mind, just how BRP Handles non-lethal combat is open to lots of possiblities. Rather than tracking subdual damage or some such, the game could just incorporate the old stun/knock out rules, and maybe have the damage apply somhow to fatigue (either by a point method if you use RQ3 fatigue points, or as a modifer to a CON roll an RQ2 ish method. Something like each mutiple of HP dropping your mutipliers by 1 for the CON roll would work.)

badcat, Put me down for another who considers the "check to improve" XP system a core part of RQ/BRP. Firth Cycles XP system is, IMO more along the lines of DragonQuest than RuneQuest. One thing that made RQ easier to run, and went over well with the D&D players was how fast/easy it was to handle experience. Rather than spending time adding up and dividing XP, things only took a couple of minutes to roll over some skills. Plus the gradual improvement gave a strong feeling of character growth. Experience ends up being a byproduct of adventuring or the goal of actual study, rather than a reward for spending time at the table or killing monsters.

What bashing? My comment wasn't a bash, but pointing out an opportunity for BRP. Holding up ONE adventure, that hasn't even been released yet hardly contradicts the point of my previous post, that the MRQ crowd would be a good crossover market for BRP campaign packs. Right now the plain is pretty barren. Considering just how fast Mongoose puts out stuff, it is fairly obvious that adventures for MRQ are not a high priority. Sure they have the capability to churn out 30 adventures a year, but they haven't. They could do a lot of things. I think Mongoose is only second to WotC as far are sheer volume of RPG output goes. Don't get ticked at me for pointing out an area that Mongoose has yet to cover. That's not a bash. I didn't type anything bad about Mongoose.

So that makes what, ONE adventure for a system that they have been publishing for over a year? While producing how many sourcebooks? Allow me to update my previous statement: "....It could be a useful way to tap all those MRQ groups. Especially since Mongoose publishes virtually no MRQ adventures."

Whatever settings they release, I really hope Chasoium goes with the campaign pack format. A setting, half a dozen or so adventures, and a enough infomration to expand. I used to show Borderlands to the local D&Ders. General consensus among the AD&D crowd was that it blew any module series away. Plus campaign packs have a higher attraction for conversion to other systems, meaning more sales. It could be a useful way to tap all those MRQ groups. Especially since Mongoose doesn't seem to publish MRQ adventures.

Oh, I think BRP certainly could use some tweaks ans upgrades. Chasoium used to tweak the game here and there. A non-lethal combat system is something of a must in this day and age, probably along with some sort of player points to adjust die rolls. I don't thing a overhaul is a good idea, just more along the lines of Agentorange's idea of sidebar rules (or maybe in the spot rules section). Keep the core rules and just proide options. There are a lot of neat things that have come out in games in the last 15 years that could benefit BRP. Even simple stuff like the retrat rule from GURPs or Usagi Yojimbo, skill stunts, perhaps a stun/shock mechanic, lots of things. A lot of this could end up in setting books too. I.e. a more advanced jousting system for a middle Ages setting.

But do you agree with ANY of it? I did say IMO. I think most BRPers would agree in part to most of it, just differ over what the percentages. I think most RQ2 fans would rate the AH deal as #1 reason. With people like you, Triffle, and Enpeze hanging around, this site feels strangely familiar.

Harnmaster comes to mind. Although a different system, it has a lot in common with RQ. Enough so that my RQ group got felt very comfortable with it. Another very BRPish game was Privateers & Gentelmen. THis was a minatures/RPG system for playing in the Age or Sail. The game system was probably closer to RQ than Other Suns was, down to including category modifiers ala RQ2. As a side bit of Trivia he game was written By Walter Jon Williams who went on to fame as a writer of cyberpunk science fiction.

Reasons why BRP isn't that popular (IMO): 1)Obscurity. With the exception of CoC the system hasn't been available, or seen much by most gamers. CoC is a game where the mechanics of BRP are sort of downplayed (most the monsters are bullet resistant). So just to be aware or BRP probably means that you've been gaming for 15 years or so. 2) Glorantha. Like it or not, it was the major obstacle to getting other gamers into RQ2. The world was just so different from the other fantasy settings (LOTR rip offs) were like that most players just didn't get it. 3) The Avalon Hill Deal Part two of the "one-two combination" that took RQ out of contention for AD&D's throne. Wheel Glorantha kept the general gaming populace away from RQ, the AH deal alienated a lot of Chaosium fans. Some over the rule changes, and a lot more over the lack of new material. It was if someone had dammed up the creative stream. We went from getting 3 or 4 new RQ products a year to no new Glorantha products for, what, 5 years? 4) Stagnation RQ/BRP was a very innovative system when first introduced. IT introduced, or improved upon many new concepts, such as active defense, armor absorption, and skill based as opposed to class/level based. All good stuff in 1978. SO good that the basic system was used for a host of other RPGs. That was 30 years ago. Nothing has evolved in the RQ/BRP rules since RQ3. A shame, since the system was one that used to have constant and contimual innovation. Sometimes BPR shows it age when compared to more recent RPGs. For instance, since RQ/BRP grew out of SCA experience, the game never developed "non-lethal" damage. 5) No much support A lot of GMs like to buy and run prewritten adventures. If there are no adventures, then they don't run that game. This sort goes with the scene after the Avalon Hill Deal. prior to that, the game got great support. I love those old boxed set campaign packs. Once the AH deal went through, not only did the Campaign Packs stop, but even Chasoim stopped using that approach on thier own games. An adventure every two or three years doesn't cut it. If you play any Chasoium RPG other than CoC you don't have much in the way of prewritten stuff. 6) Perssonel changes. Back when Chasoium was in it'S heyday, and RQ/BRP products were coming out steadily, the material was mostly written by the same group of people. The same names pop up over and over again on the credits of various products. Now, very few of those people still work for Chaosium. Nothing against the new crew, but the orginal writers are a tough act to follow. 7) Call of Cthulhu CoC was one of the first horror RPGs, and the most successful. So successful that Chaosium seemed to focus all their efforts on it to the exclusion of practically everything else. I think that Chasoium has published more stuff for CoC that for all their other game systems combined. But, CoC is rather interdependent of the system (stats don't matter much when the PCs are usually the weakest thing in the scenario). And, players who are not interested in horror role-playing and or H.P. Lovecraft will just pass the game by, and that is what the majoirty of gamers are doing. 8) We lost that lovin' feelin' Back in the late 70s/early 80s, the RPG community was different. Game designers were players, and were more interested in exhanging ideas with each other, impressing other players and actually improving a game. Now, the gaming hobby has turned into a RPG industry, and become a bit more impersonal. Back in the early days it was more about ideas and fun. Now it is about product and profit. As a result, companies that can throw around more $$$ get better market share. Even back when RQ was popular it wasn't in the stores the way D&D was. 9) CCGs These things pretty much wiped out all the small to mdedium sized RPG companies, including AH, and did a number on other companies, such as Chasoium. That7s a major reason why BRP has been in RPG limbo for over a decade. Just my take on the subject.