Jason D

I think a photo mosaic of past Chaosium covers would be neat.

I suggested this, but apparently they only own first-use rights to most of their cover artwork, or at least for those older pieces.

I guess that leads to the next question. Has the fumble tables been made less lethal?

There were some modifications, but they're still pretty bad.

On the other hand, as hit locations are now optional, the combo of fumble + hit location is only there if the GM wants it to be.

Really I think it has a lot more to do with the stuff we were originally discussing in this thread, marketing and awareness amongst gamers of what BRP had to offer... and the sorts of way Chaosium has made use of it.

I don't think it's a matter of smooshing BRP into some shape to please people who've tried it and disliked it, I think it's more a need to get it into the hands and minds of people who haven't tried it but would like it.

Thanks for stating my own beliefs so clearly.

I think that BRP isn't a "popular" game system because until now, BRP hasn't really been a game system of its own.

For the last 20 years, BRP has been for all intents and purposes just the engine by which people played Runequest, Call of Cthulhu, Stormbringer, and maybe Nephilim. If you want to extend that date back another five years, then you're bringing in out-of-print stuff like Elfquest, Superworld, Ringworld, and maybe Worlds of Wonder.

And as for those, Nephilim, Hawkmoon, Elfquest, and Ringworld weren't big-sellers because the subject matter was not well known, or the subject matter just didn't grab fans at the time. Superworld failed because it went toe-to-toe with more entrenched games like Champions, Marvel Superheroes, and Villains & Vigilantes (though the decidedly unheroic art style didn't help).

On the other hand, Stormbringer lasted for a long, long time - five editions and another game is a robust game line for any RPG. RuneQuest and BRP took separate paths for a very long time but are (more or less) back together again in a slightly different form, and Call of Cthulhu still has a huge and devout following.

So, it'll be interesting to see what the upcoming year says about BRP and how well the market embraces it. I'm just hoping that there aren't too many mistakes in the final manuscript...

How are fumbles handled in BRP? Is there a fumble chart?

Rolls of 99-00 if your skill is less than 50% are fumbles, and 00 if your skill is anything higher. There are fumble charts for melee, missile, and unarmed combat, and some guidelines are suggested for other skill, resistance roll, or characteristic check fumbles.

On topic, I know you extracted and modified the magic system from MagicWorld, and based the superpowers system on the original SuperWorld; did you use anything from FutureWorld in the design?

For my purposes, it was the weakest of the three books, in that it was very specifically one setting rather than a generic "type" of setting. The lack of space travel, for example, seemed very tied to that view rather than sci-fi in general.

Great. One last question: how about armor. Did you include 2 systems? One with fixed armor (and usable for hitlocations too) and one with var. armor like SB5?

Do heavier armor have dodge penalties? (or other penalties?)

Yes, yes, and "other penalties" (athletic- and perception-type skills).

The combat table has different effects depending on the success levels of the participants. For eg, Crit vs Fail = full damage, plus rolled damage, plus ignore armour, or parrying weapon/shield takes 4 pts of damage. There are 17 cross referenced entries and, whilst most are common sense, there are some entries where there's a lot to take in. I simply won't be able to remember the various outcomes off the top of my head! When I ran a BRP playtest combat, during the playtest session, I found that combat was slowed considerably whilst I figured the results through using the matrix.

Of course, I'm old now, and the mind isn't what it used to be. Wibble.

On the other hand, most rolls are going to end up with basic successes or failures, which don't need the chart.

Hi Jason,

Are saying that criticals are in or out? If they're out, have you amended all the skill entries that give critical effects, and removed that level of success from the combat matrix? Sorry - but I'm not clear on what you mean in the above.

Loz

Criticals are still in the core rulebook at the behest of my co-designer and the early playtest.

My preference would have been to remove them and make the system that much easier to grok.

-is SciFi Equipment/Weaponry mentioned in the new book and if yes which equipment/weapons?

Not only mentioned, but described. There are all manner of energy weapons (melee and missile) and armors, sci-fi vehicles, and some equipment described. Plus a couple of sample robots and aliens.

Not a ton, but enough to give you a good start.

But now, I have another question. Are 'heroic' or 'superheroic' styles of play supported in any way in the new book apart from different point totals or rolls during character creation?

Some guidelines in the "customizing creatures" section and in the GM sections.

I prefer straight critical/success/fail/fumble. I can get my head around it much, much better.

Even though the early playtesting showed that people wanted to keep the criticals, I was leaning towards just going "special/success/failure/fumble" to eliminate any of the confusion that came from whether a crit is actually better than a special, etc.

I liked the balance of "one normal and one better" on each side.

So they stayed in.

I personally like the 20% Specials and 5% Criticals.

This is the default for the new BRP.

Considering how fast this thread is growing, maybe it would be a good idea for Jason to do a new thread (part2, part3, etc.) once a week or after the thread gets to a certain size?

Maybe so.

Two other options present themselves:

1. Urging folks to take extended discussions of any particular topic to another thread.

2. Starting new threads about a specific question. That might be the better way to go, as it would make searching later much easier.

What is the default fatigue system (and what optional systems are there)?

It's a slightly simpler version of the one in RQ3, and a much-simpler alternate version. Both are optional rules.

As for what they are exactly... that's a "buy the book" sort of thing.

I also am seeing that we may have a definition problem. BRP can stand for both the current project of core rules and the entire concept of what a Basic Role Playing system can encompass.

You are correct in this.

I'm not opposed to any vehicle/gear systems for BRP as a game line, but in my opinion based on the project's scope and goal, the BRP book I wrote was complete enough without such a system.

How are the sample vehicles and equipment defined in the new BRP book?

Equipment is defined as it's been in the past. Rules and guidelines are provided for adding powers to equipment to improve them or increase functionality. Almost any super power can be invested in a piece of gear and paid for with character points.

Vehicles are defined on a big table with the following entries:

I believe that having those values, and around three dozen examples, makes it pretty easy for anyone to come up with some values of their own.

Does the book provide any kind of real-world benchmarks to which character or creature abilities (superstrength or superspeed, for instance) can be compared?

As much as BRP ever has.

Do you think you achieved that goal?

I think I've come closer than anyone yet has, though I'm certain that once it hits print, I'll start a list of changes for Basic Roleplaying (Revised and Expanded Edition). It always works like that.

I take it that means that no one wanted to invest the time in designing those systems? Thank you for your answer.

Joseph Paul

It wasn't really a case of "no one wanted to invest the time" - it was a question of:

a) has any BRP book ever dealt with gear/vehicle construction in such a fashion?

does BRP really have the need for those sorts of systems?

The answer to both of these questions is a resounding no, so it was easy to prioritize whether to include such a system.

Similarly, one could argue the need for a game system to include the equivalent of detailed miniatures rules, with hex- or grid-based movement, line of sight modifiers, facing, attacks of opportunity, etc., but the scope of the BRP book didn't call for it.

Just out of curiousity, would anyone here who has seen or read it recommend the Malleus Monstrorum as a monster book for a vanilla-ish BRP fantasy campaign? Is there enough non-Mythos material to make it worth the price for someone who is not especially interested in the Mythos sections?

I used many of the MM stats for the natural and some fantasy creatures.

There are dozens and dozens of non-Mythos creatures in the book. Plenty of natural creatures, supernatural creatures, and others.

From the creatures of myth and folkore section:

Animals:

And in the Mythos-related, here's a quarter of the creatures in the book:

It's an invaluable resource for any BRP related game. Run to stores now!

I have a feel that both a magic book and a creature book will be sorely needed, because the rule book divides the focus btw so many different power systems and settings.

Would that be a correct assumption? :confused:

Sverre.

I'd love to see someone do books on either subject.

I think if I handle a 'core' book after the rulebook, it'll be an expanded powers book with some more magic, sorcery, spirit magic, rune magic, more superpowers, more mutations, more psychic powers, demon creation rules, etc. But on the other hand, I would happily watch someone else write it.

It came up during the playtest, and I know that Doyle Tavener was working on a ritual magic book.

An expanded bestiary would be a natural expansion. I'm sure I don't have the time to write it, though, and I firmly believe that a better resource would be world sourcebooks with appropriate creatures, rather than a big book of monsters (of which 90% aren't going to be used in your campaign).

I read elsewhere that the new rules will include some kind of guidelines for stating up vehicles. I am not interested in any kind of crunchy design systems, but I would be delighted to find some simple general rules that allow you to quickly note down some basic vehicle data and using them in your games. I also read a sample mecha write-up was included in the rules. Am I right?

Also, are there any kind of guidelines or advice for making up your own creatures? I don't mind if there is not an extensive list of critters if you can easily create your own.

There are a variety of vehicles statted up, but no vehicle creation system. It's something I'd originally planned for, but was really outside the scope of what BRP is to most people (myself included).

There is a sample mech in the equipment chapter, and a giant robot in the bestiary.

There's some rough advice on customizing creatures, but no flat-out "here's how to create a new creature" system. I can't imagine anyone having any trouble using existing ones to stat up something original, though.

A book I'm sure Chaosium would love to see written soon after this one is an expanded bestiary. Any volunteers?

Are there rules for handling non-lethal damage? If so, can you comment on it? This would be especially useful superhero games where you generally knock out the bad guys and "bring them to justice". But would be useful in all genres when you need to capture someone.

There are rules for knocking out foes, and I think an optional rule for non-lethal damage. But I'm not 100%, as I don't have the manuscript handy and it's been a long time since the core rule stuff was written.

How character improvement going to be handled? Is it going to be like in old BRP where you then have players climbing trees and swimming in the lake for improvement roles or similar to MRQ where there a set number of improvement roles per game?

I'm not familiar with how MRQ handled it.*

However, the BRP book uses the traditional system, but there are guidelines as to when a skill check is appropriate. If a skill is not being used to further the story and no dramatic purpose is achieves, or no reasonable threat is implied (climbing a tree or swimming in the lake), the skill use is Easy (double skill). Success at an Easy skill roll does not merit a skill improvement check.

Similarly, the GM should be able to tell players when a skill improvement roll is called for, and when it's clearly just a part of the "golf bag of weapons" exploit.

* I didn't want to deal with any cross-pollination from that vector, and my extremely unpleasant experiences as a onetime freelancer for Mongoose have soured me on giving them any of my money or reading a word they've published.

Yes. But Fortune and Fate points are linked together. So if you use a Fate point as life safer you loose a Fortune point too. And if you gain one point through gaming you can use it for both things. Thats why I used the same name.

I was just trying to clarify for the people who weren't familiar with the system.

I ran a huge batch of WFRP (2nd edition) a couple of years ago when the game first came out - and am eagerly awaiting the new WFRP 40K rules to get released.

Interesting. I'll think about it, but my way to simulate 'fate points' has always been using the Luck roll. Did that come out of one of the previously published Chaosium games, or is it new for this book?

New.

Many people in the playtest remarked on the need for such a system, and I've been using them unofficially for a while.

I chose not to make it a new value (like Fate Points, etc.) because I'm not fond of adding arbitrary new systems when an existing system will work, and liked them as an expansion of power points - now every character can use them, but a character with powers must manage them a bit more carefully and make difficult choices as to which way to spend them.

First, how do the opposed roll mechanics work (Spot vs. Hide for example)?

Off the top of my head (and the rules were written early in 2006), they go as follows:

Both parties roll.

If one is successful and the other isn't, then the one who made it achieves their goal.

If both succeeded, compare quality of successes (special or critical vs. normal). Best result wins.

If quality of success is still tied, a few options are provided (actually, I think a side box has three separate options from "compare the highest successful value" to "who had the greater spread between their roll and the success"). The GM can pick the system she likes best.

Second, Are armor points fixed or variable by default? Also, do armors have different values based on attack types (melee, ballistic, energy)?

Fixed by default. Variable results provided as an optional rule.

No different armor values by type of attack - though there is a note in the weapons section that states that the GM may (optionally) decide that non-ballistic armor is worth only 1/2 value against high-velocity weapons such as firearms.

Playability over additional detail for the sake of "realism" was the guiding principle here.

What parts would you say are new, or which sections have the most original content?

Off the top of my head:

• Skill success values (for each skill - optional stuff but nicely useful)
  
• Professions that haven't appeared before
  
• Different player character levels (normal, heroic, epic, superhuman)
  
• Some spot rules are new, others have been reworked for congruence with current system
  
• Mutations and psychic powers were extensively reworked and expanded
  
• Some new super powers and magic spells
  
• Many pieces of equipment
  
• The GMing and Settings chapters are almost entirely original
  
• Some monsters never seen in BRP