Jason D

Actually, this is how I imagined things would go. The core stats in the book, potentially with expanded optional stats presented online. I did write up Stormbringer versions of the NPC stats for Slaves of Fate, a d20 adventure, and Chaosium had (has?) them online for free download.

Actually, this is how I imagined things would go. I did write up Stormbringer versions of the NPC stats for Slaves of Fate, a d20 adventure, and Chaosium had (has?) them online for free download.

At the beginning of the book, I'm going to include a section stating "Here are the options that Interplanetary recommends." It will also mention the optional rules that are specifically discouraged. If there are new optional rules, they'll be inserted into the manuscript where appropriate. If some aspect of the adventure refers to an optional rule that might apply, it'll be mentioned, even if it isn't one of those recommended above. This will be selectively applied to avoid crudding up the manuscript overmuch. If there's a place where the options conflict or diverge significantly from the core rules, they'll be distinguished or called out in some fashion in the text or in a side box. What I'm hoping to avoid is NPC writeups full of alternate values, conflicting information, and values that need to be adjusted up or down depending on what options you're adding.

Had a post here, but it just belabored a point. So deleted.

Two things I should clarify: a) I am not a line editor at Chaosium, and at no point have I stated "this is the way it's gonna be" as regards to supplements. I spoke only about what I felt would work better, and what I plan on doing for my own Interplanetary book. If Charlie comes back and says "Hey, we really need to add all of the options into your manuscript" I will do so. It's probably about the same amount of work to add optional stuff as to subtract it, and trying to go both direction makes for an extremely overcomplex NPC writeup. Some options aren't exactly compatible with one another, as well. Imagine, if you will, an NPC stat block containing all of the optional stuff, perhaps in parentheses to distinguish the stuff. I'll walk you through a combo of the options... Hit Points Per Location in addition to general HP... not much conflict there Fatigue Points and Sanity... easy enough to add... this seems easy! Armor per Hit Location is easy enough to add, but what if the GM wants random armor? Heroic Hit Points doubles HP, and causes a double value if you want to have normal HP also represented Splitting Attack and Parry Skills... hmm... now each melee weapon skill has two values - what if I only want to use one? Do I average them, or just use attack? Skill Category Modifiers - should they be presented and not added, or should they be included and GMs not wishing to use them must subtract the values from existing skills? Simpler Skill Bonuses - hmm... these don't really mesh with the above easily, do they? Increased Personal Skill Points, Cultural Modifiers, EDU/Knowledge rolls, etc. - do I add these for GMs who want to use them, and make GMs who don't want to use them remove them, or do I put them in a block alongside each NPC writeup? Skill Ratings Over 100% - hoo-boy! Do I want to play Elric! style, with NPCs with attack skills of 300% or more, do I want to keep things simple and say that 100% is the top? Does each skill have two ratings, based on where you want to put the limit? Over 100% and under 100%? And I could go on... I have no idea what BRP means for CoC. I'm assuming that Charlie and Lynn have an idea, but I'm sure they're smart enough to see how BRP does before making any decisions.

From the book: It's one of those issues I'm clarifying and making explicit - the powers types are not balanced against one another. It's stated in the text, but I'm making it front and center. If you, as a GM, feel that two power types are unbalanced against one another, it's advised to use only one of them at a time. It's just like equipment - a character in hide armor with a club is not balanced against a character in energy armor with a plasma rifle.

They provided a solid platform to build a generic multi-genre system onto that was eminently playable, with a minimum of rules complexity. RQ assumes a fantasy background, with those emphases, some of which aren't easily applicable to other genres and settings.

Thanks for recognizing this. Though the RQ mechanics are at the heart of BRP, the book I've produced is a direct descendant of Worlds of Wonder, with elements from Stormbringer/Elric!, Call of Cthulhu, RuneQuest*, ElfQuest, Ringworld, and Superworld. If I were going to play RuneQuest, I'd take out my copy of RQ3 and run that. * This is an utterly tangental point, but does anyone know why the hell runequest.com goes to Hasbro's site? Is that lingering side effect from the old Avalon Hill buyout?

I'm not trying to defend Chaosium's email response times, because that's their business, but if I were, for example, trying to reach them about a professional matter, I'd do all of these three things: 1. Email them, being sure to c.c. at least two of the people there (their individual emails are easy to get) 2. Send them a physical letter (registered is best) 3. Call them directly via the phone # they post on their site

I'll point out to Charlie that the index has some issues, but it's not something that can be fixed in a proofread. Indexes are usually generated by the page layout software, or at least they should be.

The spell should only have an effect during the combat round it's used (and I'll clarify it in the text). For example, your character casts Pox (1) on some enemy. When the spell goes off, make a resistance roll. If the enemy loses the resistance roll, he loses 1D6 power points, and can't cast a spell for the remainder of the combat round. You can choose to keep casting Pox each round to thwart the enemy (and if you keep winning, it's likely they'll run out of power points and fall unconscious). If the enemy goes before you in combat, delay your action until the next combat round.

That's sort of how it's supposed to be working.

My experience was that the playtesters unfamiliar with previous editions of BRP found it worked fine, while the longtime BRP partisans are noting the ambiguities or things that have never been particularly cut-and-dried. A drawback of the project has been dealing with some issues that have house rules older than some of the potential player base...

One of the things on my plate is a revision of the 16-page BRP booklet, featuring the basic-est version of the rules (no options, simplified somewhat). I'm hoping it'll be available either cheaply or free via .pdf, and will be one of those "you could technically run a non-powers game from just this if you wanted to" sorts of products.

I've been swamped and haven't been able to jump in lately on this thread, but you've actually nailed the problem. There were a lot of preconceived notions about how combat would work from existing BRP players (mostly from the RQ-centric player base), so I don't know if things got explained as clearly. Also, the subtle changes in the system between the many variants of BRP are confusing how things are presented in the book vs. how they're ingrained in people's minds. So right now I'm going through the whole combat chapter to ensure that it's as clearly worded as possible.

I've seen them, but am making sure my answers are correct before replying. Thanks!

I'll have to double-check when I get home and to my copy of the rules, but I believe it's the first of the two. That's why the AP of shields are so high - they're not easy to damage.

The attack/parry matrix is correct, while the spot rule is in error. I'll address it. It was included (if I remember correctly) to address times when an attacking weapon should have a better-than-normal chance of breaking a shield or parrying weapon, even on a successfully-parried blow. One such condition might be when the attacker is more than twice the SIZ of the parrying character. I'll clarify the text.

Already been noted and sent on, but thanks!

Good points. It's a bit unclear, but the attack/parry matrix is the ultimate authority. I'll address it with my edits.

It's an oversight. It should default to the Stormbringer 5 system.

Issues noted. Thanks! I'll give the combat example another look - maybe even rewrite it from scratch if I've got the time.

I'll clarify, but it's 1 point of armor value per level. The summary chart is in error - it's 1% per level.

I'm curious what you mean by this.

I am collecting all errata I have made to the Edition Zero book, and will present a "cleaned up" version of it for posting on Chaosium's site and for inclusion with any further sales of the EZ book. I'll post a link to it here. By "cleaned up", I'm not going to bother including stuff like "the chapter reference on page XX needs to be in bold", "this should be an em dash instead of a hyphen", non-mechanics typos, etc. Since Chaosium is also having external proofers work on the manuscript who're sending their edits directly to them, I'm not really able to integrate that stuff myself, though I'll see if they can do so.