Aini

I am curious as to what the Delta Force wounds system is, i don't suppose you might share the name of the book?

Ah i see, i would have voted BGB then probably as that is my next favourite But to be honest i like all the systems, when roleplaying the minor differences in rules really seem minor.

I voted for chaosium runequest. I assume it means RQ2/3 RQ3 is my favourite version of the d100 system thus far

My groups tend to run these days on Fantasy Grounds 2, Google Hangouts, and probably soon Roll20 with a mixture of text and voice. Older groups prior to my moving was often done on table top with mainly books and printed materials, though there was no ban on electronic devices this was mainly before the popularity of tablets, though we did sometimes bring up pdf's on laptops or phones in rare cases. I can honestly say there are advantages to both ways, online tabletop has the advantage of a little more anonymity which can aid in visualisation for roleplay, i also know of some people who use voice changers to make their voice sound the way they picture their character's voice sounding which i find really quite cool, however i have still always found the table top method of sitting around with friends to be more fun.

Most of my differences have been the fantasy elements being added, every time i start writing the details on the cultures of my world, i look at the fantasy elements and how they effect the day to day life of regular people, how real magic effects them, the existence of the ghost rock, the non human sentient races and how they might influence development... and i end up with something very different to what i originally started with.

Thank you Mankcam, The fantasy earth settings you listed are great settings of ancient and medieval, though i have not read all of those, the ones i have are more historical than fantasy, i am aiming for a lot more fantasy elements than those have Your advice in the closing paragraph is spot on and greatly appreciated, i think i will endeavour to set it apart more from ancient earth than i originally intended. Though to be honest the more i work on it the more i have been doing that anyway as i really am trying to make something unique

Thank you for the response, my book is primarily about the setting, the fact i am writing a set of core rules with it is due to copyright mainly, writing a setting supplement for BRP for example requires permission from Chaosium to reference their core rulebook and i am not a legal expert on these kinds of things, so i felt it easiest to just write my own rules that are different enough to avoid copyright issues and hopefully similar enough that my setting (plus its unique magic systems) could be easily adapted to BRP, OQ or any other d100 system if desired. The setting itself is actually based on my own interpretation of a low fantasy alternate earth. Integrating fantasy elements into cultures inspired by the ancient greeks, romans, vikings, egyptians, mongols etc. So far i have been writing this book more for my own enjoyment than anything else. The eventual plan to publish it on DrivethruRPG is mainly a goal i have set to keep myself motivated on my writing.

This is actually the reason why i am making my own d100 system as opposed to making my campaign setting a supplement for an existing one (which is what i originally wanted to do), my own rules are so that i do not violate copyright on the existing ones. The rules themselves are 'similar' enough for me to still call it d100 but i am trying to differentiate myself from the others in how i approach it and how it ties in to the setting itself. I probably gave the wrong impression in my initial post given that our gaming group used to homebrew bits from different games for my setting. Those rules are not what i am printing, i am actually writing my own rules from scratch, though keeping the magic systems i had been using since i had written those myself already. I also appreciate your response Smiorgan. I am aware of all those systems you mentioned, plus most of the older ones (and own copies of all except magic world i think) and though it is already a crowded market, there are many other systems out there such as GURPS, D&D and such that have multiple settings of the same genre. I only hope mine will differentiate itself from the other d100 settings enough to warrant interest. I do appreciate your honest answer though a little disheartening.

Hello, I have been a reader and member of this forum for some time, i am a tabletop gamer who loves the d100 systems, i have played from Runequest 2nd edition, to 3rd edition and eventually BRP and have been keenly interested in all the different evolutions of the system that we have now, in my gaming groups however we never actually found one of these that fit us 'perfectly' we often used some rules from one, some from another since most of these systems are quite similar enough to do that so that it would fit the campaign setting we play in. I decided some time ago to begin writing up my campaign setting as a d100 supplement professionally to sell on drivethru rpg, however i was unable to decide on what rules system to 'attach' it to and eventually decided that i would write the system that 'i' wanted and integrate it with my campaign world which would avoid any potential issues with copyright. So i guess this is an open letter to the d100 community on whether a new self-contained rules system and integrated fantasy setting would be of interest?

I am not a fan of fate points personally but i can see some value in it to reward/encourage roleplaying with your group... That said roleplaying is quite a subjective thing and everyone has different styles/approaches to this. Ive found some people simply cannot 'act' in character, speaking in 1st person as if they was the character speaking. Yet the same person may be very good at playing a consistent character in 3rd person. The key is playing a character consistently i think within the characters concept and their background and such. Something i do for my games is REQUIRE all players write a fairly detailed background (often i work with them a little to get campaign specific details in there) before we start a game, this helps them to roleplay a character well within the game itself. Players who just write stats on a character sheet will have far more trouble in visualising and personalising with a character. Ok so that was off on a bit of a tangent from your actual question, but if i was awarding Fate Points in the manner you suggest i would stick to it being a roleplaying reward for playing characters consistently. It would be an arbitrary reward via your discretion and only obtainable that way. I would probably cap them at 1/5 of POW stat or something like that. Note: Power Points and Fate Points are not the same thing, Power Points are the 'fuel' for spells/psychic powers and such, Fate Points are not the same thing at all and are used like a 're-roll' or such for most circumstances that are going bad Edit: just went over the Fate Point section of BGB and i see what you mean.. they actually use power points to fuel Fate Points. (never remembered the section before since i didnt like the idea of them i guess) But yea i would replace the 'power points' requirement to just 1 fate point gained in manner above for each of the uses.

I have always been tempted to do a BRP conversion of Dark Sun, such a wonderful setting. And if Hit Locations and Random Armour systems are intended to be mutually exclusive to one another i do not recall reading such, but i *Always* use Hit Locations in my games for so many years... just not using them would feel wrong Out of curiosity would Dark Sun conversion even be publishable even for free? i know they had a 3E Dark Sun website for D&D, but that was before WoTC did a 4E Darksun themselves, and they are pretty hawkish on their IP's generally.

I do not really see the 'need' for them, it does not add realism (and my games strive for realism and atmosphere, i find realism aids in immersion) so even though i run low combat games, the extra time spent on this rule just feels like a waste of effort

I agree with this, I have most RQ2 and RQ3 books and i dont find any of it really requires much houseruling (However i DO use the SR, Fatigue and hit location rules from BGB). Once the optional rules from BGB are in use the game is not a lot different to RQ3 anyway. I actually made the mistake of buying Basic Magic, Basic Creatures, Basic Gamesmaster not realising they are exact copies of material i already had (and already had multiple copies since i had RQ3 games workshop edition and deluxe adition from Avalon Hill?) so i was a little irritated that they was published in the RQ3 format to begin with. The edited version described here sounds like what basic magic/gamesmaster/creature should have been from the start to me... However i wont buy them due to already having the material essentially and whilst its good enough to have 3 copies of it... its not so good i need 4 copies *Grin* Also i would like to add as a title... Basic Magic / Basic Gamesmaster / Basic Creatures should not be named thus... Basic Roleplaying is multi-genre and the 3 books named are very fantasy specific books and the title should reflect that imo.

I do this all the time It is much more fun describing a wound (and effect) than giving it a number. I do a lot of rolls behind the scenes for similar reason As to a pleasure cult... if it has a bit of an evil twist it could have a summon succubi/incubi spell, demonic pleasure slave type things although I imagine they would be a little more than that if not handled right The Glamour spell for +APP would be good as mentioned, a spell for entering a dreamstate (got the idea from dreamlands title you mention, ive not read the book however) which could draw other 'dreamers' into your dreamstate where dreamers (including caster) would have power to manipulate the dream based on POW rating (would likely use POW to replace each statistic in the dream version of themselves also or such) Ok so thats just the start of some wierd idea but your welcome to it if it interests (as I wrote this I am probably going to make my own little dreamstate system also for one of my game world magic systems)

Personally i have never had any surprise/initiative mechanic in my games and never found them necessary because i always use the SR system. But 'realising a fight is about to happen' should not really take any difference in time between someone with an IQ of 80 or 160. The the thought process difference would most likely be in miliseconds, The differences in reaction speed would really come from training, being alert... naturally fast reaction (DEX) The SR system covers this fine imo.

Having done fencing in my time I do not believe intelligence plays any part beyond retaining the knowledge (which imo would simply be the skill % in game terms) Having a high IQ myself I was able to 'pick up' fencing quite fast in relation to some of the others however i am only 5'3" and there is a guy there who is 6'6" who has a serious advantage when it came to sparring against one another. I had to go two steps to his one when it came to footwork so it is not simply down to reach. That said when it comes to weapon length and reach and such it becomes less and less relevant as the skill on the practitioners rise, and that is also true also in BRP Whilst i disagree on including INT in the mix on initiative, i do agree on weapon skill perhaps playing more of a part. (If i was to implement the weapon skill playing a part i would likely have certain % on skill lowering the weapons SR by 1 or maybe 2)

Ive always rationlised that someone with larger SIZ would not give up the reach advantage, and constantly move to keep that advantage and thus retain the SIZ strike rank in combat. As a side note, I find the success of BRP (at least with me and my group) are the way its rules work in a very logical fashion. Any rules that work in illogical and abstract way spoil the system imo. And Combat Maneuvers is one of those rules that are abstract in the way they are implemented (as is using charisma as a measurable statistic when there is already social skills but thats another point ) I look forward to whatever The Design Mechanism produces however, as more Runequest can never be a bad thing (Even if i dont use the core rules there will be pleanty of suppliments that i can use )

by max stat, do you mean max with spells and such, or max base (through training etc) For my games ive had STR/CON/SIZ = maximum is highest of the 3 for all 3 (However SIZ could not be altered naturally) INT = Static POW = maximum is min+max DEX/APP = maximum is max x1.5 Spells add to these with no upper limit, however the effects obviously are temporary and often limited by other means (such as magic/power points) I think this was how RQ3 worked

Personally i would stick with using POW in all magic systems. Keep an EDU requirement to learn spells or such (could have different EDU requirement for each spell or some such) Each system could work differently though even with all using POW. Glamour could be similar to the old RQ3 divine magic system (Sacrifice POW to learn re-usable spells), Peasant could be kept as a lower power but easier to learn magic that has less drawbacks (no POW sacrifice) and the college learned magic could be most diverse/powerful in many ways but each spell having its own seperate skill to learn similar to RQ3 Sorcery, and an EDU requirement to learn perhaps) Just some suggestions

Not sure if we are talking about the same thing unless there are published post-apocalyptic settings in Germany. I have not seen any actual published post-apocalyptic setting beyond rubble and ruin, which is more generic style material for use in making your own post-apocalyptic world really than its own full setting (as is the nature of monographs i think) When i speak of a full campaign setting, i am referring to settings like Glorantha to make a comparison, (multiple products, lot of detail and lore). Glorantha is what sold RQ2 and RQ3 for the most part (Although RQ3 had its historic setting also). BRP has no such product to help sell it, unless Call of Cthulhu counts, but Cthulhu is marketed and seen as a completely separate game. I dont think BRP would loose its generic nature by having detailed campaign setting(s) added, and it would help sell the product to a far wider audience As to the original question, i do not think BRP is actually doing bad at all, its gaining support and following but at a slow rate. My own group uses BRP as its favourite rules system, but only when i am GM, when others GM they tend to lean towards CoC, D20 or GURPS as they require less work from the GM

I find when it comes to getting players for BRP i have to advertise the setting rather than the system (At least with players who never heard of BRP) I have worlds i have created myself for use with BRP, High-Fantasy, Historic-fantasy and a sci-fi setting. I think for BRP to have a more global success it needs to have its own world settings published that are not generic. (Something like how Glorantha was for RQ3) This could then be marketable to a wider audience. At the moment BRP only really has historic settings that are easy to use (Or glorantha if you have some of the old RQ3 suppliments). A unique and well developed setting such as post-apocalypse or sci-fi could expand the audience a lot as there are few sci-fi or post-apoc type settings for RPG's in general.