pansophy

just a quick question: the error in the A&D Matrix regarding special successes is a known issue? The rules say Special Successes do normal weapon damage, where the matrix shows maximum damage should be applied. I've never seen the error as I never used the chart until last week - and some of the files in the DL section did copy this 'error'. Now I'm unsure wether the chart is wrong, or the rules?!

Looks like a typo to me, but I'm unsure it the +5% is wrong or the example. Something at SIZ 30 is about 400kg, SIZ 60 about 4,5 tons. My judgement would be the example is right, so the bonus would be +10% for each 10 points of size above SIZ 30. This only works, if the weight to heigh ratio is somewhat comparable, so that the 4,5 ton thing is about 9 times larger than the 400kg thing - which would be huge. The simplified rule (if it's double your size, then add +20%) is probably the more elegant way to do it.

I think instead of start calculating DEX ranks, one should try the Strike Ranks system. It was build for this amount of detail and clearly handles it in a better and easier way. As far as 'stunning' goes when using the Strike Rank system, I would judge the d3 'lost rounds' are the next d3 actions. Simple and smooth.

If the orc is stunned at DEX 10 and the effect lasts one round, that would mean the orc may attack at DEX 10 the next round again, if it usually attacks at DEX 11. I mean, the orc would not lose its attack in the second combat round completely, would it? But then, with these interpretation, there would be nearly NO impact for the orc - except of the delayed action - right?

Yes, it is not complicated, if you have a small battle. But in larger battles with 10 or more combatants it is cumbersome to keep track of all the DEX ranks and round indicators. In these cases, it can get out of hand very fast. For small battles, this amount of detail can be handled easily.

(My) Rule Clarification: If something is stunned for X amount of rounds, it means the target loses its actions for the next X rounds, starting with the current round. This includes all offensive actions as well as 'other' active actions. The Target is still able to parry if he or she makes a successful Idea roll for each attempt. Furthermore, all attacks against the target are made as if Easy actions. The stunned target can attempt to flee, but to do so requires a successful Idea roll to discern an escape path and a successful Agility roll to get out of danger. Example: An orc attacks a knight at DEX 20, but misses. At DEX 16 the knight attacks the orc, stunning it for 2 rounds. The orc wanted to grab some keys from a nearby table at DEX 15, but since it is stunned now, this action is not possible. The next combat round starts, the orc at DEX 20 is still stunned and so the knight attacks at DEX 16 again, hitting it (this is an Easy task now). The Ork needs the rest of this round to recover and so the third combat round starts. The orc goes first, this time grabbing the keys first, deciding to delay its attack to DEX 15. The knight attacks at DEX 16 and misses. The orc uses the opportunity to slowly make its way back to a door and trying to shut it, blocking the knight the tunnel behind it. This was DEX 15, ending the round. The fourth round starts, the orc closing the door at DEX 20 while the knight tries to forfeit this intention. This would be an opposed Strength Resistance roll. [...]

@vagabond: Yes, I agree with that. If the situation really has to be measured in that very detail, your DEX rank explanation is completely right. In practise, I find it too cumbersome and simply rule "The orc loses its next three attacks (as it is allowed to attack once per combat round)" and I'm done Let's not overcomplicate it, this is not GURPS or HERO ... ^^

@vagabond: Yes, the way you see it is right from a mathematical way. But as I quoted earlier, the rules for Powers count Combat rounds in a different way - effects simply end at the start of the next combat round, no DEX ranks mentioned. But whatever works for a gaming group best will be fine I guess ...

I would love to see these rules summarised in the next Uncounted Worlds Magazin!

@ Pnic: I do not think so. I have never seen Chaosium answering any questions on this forum, and I am not aware of any official one. But that does not mean they do not read this forum. Maybe not as a regular visitor, but occasionally I bet they do (I once got an answer from Dustin that implies at least he is aware of this website).

looks like it is a matter of taste and interpretation

errata would be wonderful ... As far as tightening up goes: I don't think they will do it. It's a huge amount of work to do that, all the page renumbering, etc. If they do, I would be very impressed - but on the other side I would like to see them putting that time into some other product (Monograph or setting).

p384 would be the back of the Character Sheet - which would make sense in a way. If they do that, I hope they put out a free PDF for the Reference section then.

I wrote an email to RPG Now - usually it takes 2 days for a response

@ragr: I love the cover of the BRP Book. And the yellowish background ... It looks nice on my old desk, next to a special edition of Edgar Allan Poe's collected stories and Poems. But that's just me ...

I would go with the definition as used for Powers: "Powers used in a previous round will “go off” at the beginning of a new combat round if their effects are not instantaneous." and "Most powers require exactly one full combat round to prepare and use, with their effects occurring at the beginning of the next combat round during the powers phase." To simplify things during a combat, I would judge according to these definitions, that the 'stun effect' lasts for one round and the orc simply looses its next actions until the next combat round begins. This would only be useful though, if the orc has more than one action in a round. Otherwise it is just a roleplay effect to show how effective the blow was. Or, in a different situation, that the stun effect will start next round and end at the end of that round as well. This I would do, if the orc only has one action in a combat and it is a potential threat to the PCs.

I must admit, I never had a problem with all the options BRP offers. In my opinion BRP was meant to be a big toolkit where you choose your optional rules upfront, depending on your setting and mood. Then you work from there. Until last week I never used the "Attack and Defense Matrix", always felt it was too cumbersome to look up every roll. Last week I tried it and was surprised how it sped up melee combat (a bit, as as PCs were lucky to roll a lot of special successes). Anyway, I think if you have a look at page 383 and tick the options you want to use for your game, it can be pretty simple and easy. After a while you can spice it up by using some more optional rules. This is what the book advises as well. If you want a more straight forward system, you can use "The Laundry" for Modern campaigns. It is BRP streamlined and eliminates some options and leaves you with a nice fast gaming system (a bit more complex than CoC). If wou want to have a good Fantasy system, you can use RQ3 or MRQ2 and start from there - adding some BRP rules where needed. I know it's not that easy as described, but I think BRP is a mighty rules book with lots of possibilities that some people might use while others don't. The difficulty some people have is they try do use every optional rule - and in some cases the system does not support this, some rules even contradict each other (e.g. pool of HP and Hit Locations). The BRP rulebook is not meant to provide "Basic" rules, that's what the Quickstart rules are for. It's meant to be "Basic" as in "Basis" for a RGP System, a complete book including everything you can think of (which it doesn't, but it gives a pretty good start)

The BRP BGB is indeed a massive thing. When I first saw it, i was impressed, later intimidated and after the third or fourth (!) reading, I finally "got" it. For a beginner, my advice is to: - read the Quickstart Rules first, especially the combat example - completely ignore the Optional rules - ignore the Spot rules and look them up if you need them during play (and keep a copy of the Spot Rules Index Box on page 212) - for a Magic system, read the descriptions for each one and then decide which you want to use - use the INDEX! It is extremely well done and helpful - use something to mark the chapters and useful pages (e.g. adhesive flags) so you can easily find them - download the GM screen from the DL section If you read the book multiple times you will discover it is throughly cross-referenced and rules are repeated again and again. This is done intentionally, so when looking up a skill, you will also get a short rules recap (e.g. Dodge, Attack or Parry come to my mind). This means a big part of the book is 'repetition' and makes it 'intimidating' in the end. But in the end it's really not that hard once you get your head around it. I also found the Savage Worlds nice and slim and easy to pick up. But I also found myself missing a rule from time to time, because it is only mentioned once somewhere in the rulebook which I simply did not catch in the first place (Off-Hand penalty comes to my mind and +1 Attack for multiple foes attacking someone).

@Legion: seems someone has a very different opinion about "Hackmaster Basic". While I have no idea if the gut is right or wrong, it still is a bit funny to read. http://kuoi.com/~kamikaze/RPG/review_hackmaster_basic.php

I am not saying BRP does not have any faults. But it is sturdy and the faults are easily 'house-rule'able. It is the system that works best for our group and we really have tried many systems. If you find it different and found a system that suits you better, that is not only OK but excellent! That is why there are so many systems out there. BRP clearly lacks good advertisement and support. In fact Chaosium was never known for being 'innovative' at all. They reprint their CoC stuff time over time over time and sometimes even do not change any artwork or character stats. I find this annoying. 'Basic GM', 'Basic Creatures' are the best examples. I still like them, because they are still valuable in a way. But they could have done better, even more generic. But that's how Chaosium is and always was - and I think always will be. The community here is the real BRP, supporting the rules and creating settings. And I appreciate that a lot and even buy the Monographs I will never play - just because I am curious what people do and I want to support their efforts. With a better marketing and good colour versions with a hell of some artwork, two or three supporting settings, I bet BRP could be up and running within a year again. Thing is, there are not too many gamers left to buy a Pen and Pencil RPG anymore. The hobby itself has gone down to a minimum, which is no wonder if you look at today's possibilities: XBox, PS3, Wii, PC games, etc. Still, there are companies like Great White Games, which are able to have good artwork, a hand full of settings and colour printed books. And they seem to make money with it. But I think it is simply that Chaosium is not interested in being big in the market. For me it looks like they have a steady income of money and simmer their systems on a low level. Maybe they do not need any more money, maybe the work needed to do it is not worth it. I have no idea why it is the way it is, but I still love the BRP system for what it offers: heaps of fun for our group.

I would love to have the possibility to get hard-copy books. But living in Australia makes shipment extremely expensive and unattractive. So the only choice is a PDF and if it is 'good enough' to get it printed and stapeled. The number of books I actually got printed made me a good skilled person in "Craft (book binding)". I think over the time I archived a skill of about 40% or so, doing softcover perfect bound books now as a hobby.

Thanks for bringing up the generic point of view. It was exactly what I wanted to say. I have no idea why everyone puts BRP in the same boat with High Fantasy settings. I haven't actually played BRP with high fantasy at all and I am not going to any time soon - because I simply love my PA setting and our SciFi setting too much! Our group once set down and looked at many systems for our games: GURPS, HERO, SWEx, GDi/GD3, FATE, Mythic, KARMA and some other smaller indy games. Some just didn't klick rules wise, because they were too complicated. Others we tried and while they were fun to play, they did not show to be interesting in the long term. SWEx was really nice, but all these Feats got boring over the time to remember and the Powers were the worst thing getting bored by, as they are always the same and do not offer variety (except for the 'dressing'). And you had to have 'Fighting'. And 'Vitality'. Or you got screwed very soon. But I am not judging the SW game system, all I want to say is, BRP is better for our group, because we DO like a system where Talents/Perks/Flaws/Hindrances are OPTIONAL or not given. We love a simple system WITHOUT different 'Target Numbers'. And I as a GM love a system where I can create a bad guy within 5 Minutes to suit the needs. Without looking up tables and special abilities. Or Perks. Or Flaws. I really HATE these overcomplicating rules-exceptions. If there is a special ability, why not simply put it into the description?! What on earth is sooo difficult with that?! We are not playing BRP 'because we are sticking one's head in the sand', but because there is a REASON why we play it. And we LOVE it the way it is. And we can use this wonderful system for every setting we like: SciFi, Post-Apo, Fantasy, Historical, Horror, One-Shots. It is one of the most simple systems around, rules medium and easy to grasp for everyone - even people that have families and work long hours during the week. Well, that's my story ...

OK, here's my quick and dirty GM screen. Maybe someone finds it useful. Together with the printed Reference section of the BGB all tables should be at hand then. let me know what you think! http://basicroleplaying.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=384

@tectuctitlay: excellent! Seems we have the same fundamental idea about Perks, Traits and Flaws. I am really looking forward to it.