frogspawner

I hope there's plenty of us out there. Being reasonable folks, maybe we don't usually shout as loud as some others, that's all... Well, it is a collection of previous works, so you can't blame it for not bringing much that's new. But there are some things, and others are treated in a more flexible way. SB/CoC with imports? That's what it is! (And generally the bells and whistles are firmly optional). So I urge you to get it, either BRP0 and/or BRP1 - you may find nuggets of gold that'll unexpectedly delight you. I did! (Oh, and while you're shopping, scoop a copy of the Order Of The Stick adventure game, too - it's a great laugh!) The core mechanics should be the simplest possible (within reason), so the complications come only from options you think are worth adding. ("Firecube"? What? Do you have dirt on 4e? Oh do please tell...!) >:-> Sounds like an extended version of a good ol' RQ2 mechanic. Hurrah! The Parry part is essentially the "Deflection" ability I advocated earlier. Another 'special ability' that kicks-in at 100%+, so there's another precedent for gaining extra 'shticks' at 100. Fine RQ2 provenance too... :thumb: Relax, Badcat. I thought that was aimed at me - having once described subtraction (or was it addition?) as 'advanced mathematics', in the context of opposed rolls. And I don't mind. In what ways? I don't know GURPS. (Er, though come to mention it, I think I reviewed it once...) See? Not everyone wants extra things. Yay, Options! The way to go...

From a quick look it's: HERO-style; Yes, modifiers; and Your Choice (various points options given). Not really my area, though.

Yes, this is why the core mechanic should be the simplest - and people can add options to suit their taste. So the deflection-type complications really ought not to be built-in to the fundamental combat rolls. Same here. Sadly, I think the Attack/Parry matrix does have opposed roll type ideas built-in to it (although not the full-blown 'highest-roll-wins' garbage, at least not by default). Exactly! You have hidden well, but the Creature has spotted something to make it suspicious, and is coming closer... and more hide/spot rolls (or other actions) are needed to resolve the matter. Opposed rolls smack of impatience ("I want a winner NOW!") and invite trivializing situations that may deserve more drama.

Um, er... Well, there shouldn't be any conflict at all! :innocent:

Well, I like the simple old "whack - clang" mechanism. And (call me an old fashioned C man if you will) I still say that a simpler solution is a better one (and certainly better than two different solutions). If as you say higher-skilled fighters learn how to deflect, rather than intercept, I'd say that's a good reason to introduce a "Deflection" ability at, say, 100%+ (like Splitting Attacks). That could give the 'sorry but your hit actually missed' effect in some way, without the complexity of opposed rolls in combat. The idea of this sort of extra (perhaps less-than-Legendary) Ability (dare I say 'Feat'?) was mooted in another thread recently.

Don't flame me, I ain't flamin' you! Yes, it's nice and civilized here - I haven't been to that Other Place for ages... I'm not interested in roasting anyone, just finding the best system. You may well be right that it won't be very near the intuitively-correct 50% mark, though it's probably less clear-cut for lower skills. Time permitting, I'll do some calculations on those odds (but if anyone else would care to, please feel free!). The simpler the system, the better. (Surely as a C man you can appreciate that). One mechanic would be better than two. Would you care to tell us about the unopposed roll mechanic you use for weapons v shields?

"Opposed Rolls... higher skill wins ties." That's not accurate, since one or other can special/critical/fail when the other doesn't. This statistic appears to assume they both have the same 'DoS' at the same time, which ain't necessarily so. If you examine the odds properly I think you'll find it's similar to the contentious MRQ method. Not as simple as it could/should be, and awfully unrealistic too. A parried hit is not simply a miss - it's a different event in it's own right, and could/should have different effects.

The default system is random rolls for characteristics. But since there is a point-buy system for these stats, the BRP rules do have an answer to that question. (A complex one though, since some stats are worth more points than others. Either 3.5 or 10.5, I guess, on average). With the points-buy system, non-human stats could be a non-problem if you ignore the suggestion that the GM "should adjust your starting points and/or initial characteristics appropriately" (or just decree that it's appropriate to give nothing extra). Then the only advantage they get is higher/lower racial limits to buy up/down to. In principle, nothing. But, to be fair, shouldn't other races also get that option if they're willing to forego some stats or skills?

Then, since I don't like Opposed Rolls, you can see one good reason I don't like MRQ! (Although I can live with ORs for non-combat contests, like Hide v Spot, when used with a variation suggested by Nickmiddleton IIRC, i.e. higher skill wins ties). Yes, combat matrices are clumsy, and 'get in the way'. So please tell, what are the "DoS mechanics"?

Yeah, but I don't think any of the BRP0 options for combat is free of the 'Opposed Roll' taint. I don't like to think about that - it makes me queasy. But Jason said he'd be revising the combat chapter wording for 1st Ed, so there's always hope...

If you're interested in balance, you'll probably be using some sort of points-buy system (though maybe only for skills). So to balance the races as well, just make them also cost some of those points, proportional to the benefits of the race. Easy, right?

Good points, thanks. And yes, making space for pictures would be good. Being just a fantasy RP-er, I'm not sure I'm qualified to do even generic examples from other settings, but I'm sure you're right that it'd benefit from that. I think I'll probably just shelve this idea for now. Ah, well, I think you'd have to ask the Chaosium guys about that, because it's basically a severely cut-down version of their introductory BRP booklet from 20+ years ago. Not wanting to tread on their toes, I should probably remove it. It's served it's purpose, of proving the 4-page principle and drawing-out constructive comments.

Mmm, nice setting! Almost makes me want to use it with BRP... Yes, I was aiming for 4 A4 sides, so it'd fit on 1 double-sided A3 sheet. (Glad to see theirs was 5 sides too!) Are compelling settings the key? The original BRP guide seemed to be aiming for the player to feel involved straight away, by creating a character of their own. I don't know which approach is best, but don't know the upcoming settings well enough to do one in that style, so may persevere with the old one. Anyone else care to give it a go...?

Thanks, and thank you for taking the time to have a look at it. I see the problem with the heading (it just says "BRP BasicRolePlaying BRP" in Batavia font - the closest I had to the Hobo used in Ed.Zero - and it's all Greek to me now I'm on this laptop instead!), but that's just cosmetic. (Solved in pdf?) Other feedback I have had (from a randomly-selected member of it's target audience, my son the WoW player!) is that it's "a lot of text" (and the fight with the Bear is tough!). So it might be better cut down even more drastically (though lack of a character sheet is a problem). But, would something like this be useful as an "advertising flyer" to give away free?

Absolutely. This difference in attitude is fundamental to the systems and is clear from the way they handle experience and, particularly, hit points. As I often say when players complain about how few HPs they get: Do you want to be a Bully or Hero?

Same here, by simply imposing a limit of INT ticks (experience checks). So would you say such limits are unnecessary?

And not everyone likes Adobe/pdf's. Anyone who doesn't have Word might like to download the Word Viewer, free.

BRP - A Brief Introduction Ok, how's this? A boiled-down (and updated) version of the original BRP pamphlet. It's 5 pages, not 4, but close enough to establish the principle, I hope. And not all the shrinkage is due to using a smaller point-size! Just thought I'd put this out there for comments before putting any more work in. And is it even a worthwhile exercise? Making it smaller still is possible, but will be harder...

Yeah, Chaosium's site still says it's due for release "early next year" - I hope that's just not been updated since '07, but maybe they mean it...

Since the use of Fate Points and/or Powers are options, the GM has total control over whether they are used in his/her campaign - right? So a GM could put conditions on their use. (Surely it doesn't have to be a simple "Yes/No"...?) So, under the Rules As Written, a GM would be perfectly entitled to say, for examples: 1) If you have a weapon skill of 100%+, you can spend FP to maximize Damage with that specific type of weapon 2) If you have a weapon skill of 150%+, you can spend FP to activate an Ability to negate some armor 3) If you have 100%+ Dodge, you can spend FP to activate an Ability to 'roll with a blow' (i.e. innate armor) etc... True?

Pessimism is generally accurate, I find. (Look, I don't want to say too much, but haven't you guys heard of tempting fate?)

Wouldn't you pay 30-odd quid for it? With the dollar as it is, that's the price including postage to order it direct off Chaosium - and you'd have it in two weeks. But there's less than a hundred Ed.Zero's left...

Well it's a good job our Jason is whiter-than-white, perfectly pure in thought and deed! That's right, isn't it Mr D? (Not sure about that Sam bloke, though... )

Another release date to look forward to. Yay.

But the default is the standard dogma, so it can't be heresy. And SR/HitLoc/etc are permissible options, so they're not heretical either. Awkwardnesses might arise when translating between options, but I don't think that'll happen very often. Same here. So Mr D's BRP pleases me, at least! It's sensible to have the simplest version as the core, and the various complications as optional extras. If anyone asks "where's the Advanced RolePlaying?" to go with the Basic - we can say it's the same book, if you use the options.