New version

[Prinz Slasar]

Personally, I hope that Chaosium will not focus too much on BRP. Any BRP product being worked on would be a Glorantha product not being worked on.

I very much hope that Chaosium stays with the USP "Glorantha" and does not drift too much into generic systems.

That is of course only my personal, modest opinion as a Glorantha fan.

[Nick J.]

27 minutes ago, prinz.slasar said:

Personally, I hope that Chaosium will not focus too much on BRP. Any BRP product being worked on would be a Glorantha product not being worked on.

I very much hope that Chaosium stays with the USP "Glorantha" and does not drift too much into generic systems.

That is of course only my personal, modest opinion as a Glorantha fan.

It's not a zero sum game.

[smiorgan]

46 minutes ago, g33k said:

However, note the licensing issue(s)...  I mean, I don't think you or I know them.

But I expect the issues are non-trivial, given that the French Mourneblade still seems to carry Mongoose markings...?

Sure, I have no idea of the licensing issues. It's all hypothetical.  But, let's not drift off-topic...

 

 

[Lloyd Dupont]

Well there are other generalists in the D100 family!  

I am having a go at Revolution D100 now...
It has lots of good things  

The only "bad thing" is that despite an apparent simplicity at the get go, plenty of unexpected complexity comes into view when playing... But eventually it become simple again!

Edited October 17, 2019 by Lloyd Dupont

[seneschal]

Good discussion.  See what you started, Tigerwomble?

AlthoughI I own CoC 6th edition and supplements and monographs from the same era, for me the BGB is the core rulebook, for a couple of reasons.  I missed Chaosium's 1980s heyday, choosing to play other games, although I was certainly aware of Chaosium titles.  So I came at the system as a complete newbie.  I liked Lovecraft's stories but wasn't sure I was ready for hardcore horror role-playing, and the lurid covers made it look hardcore.  In similar fashion, i thought the very notion of Ducks was a hoot but wasn't sure I was ready for the deep dive into RuneQuest and its thick Gloranthan mythology in order to enjoy them.  The BGB enabled me to learn the Chaosium house system while applying it to genres I was more interested in.  And I came at it in baby steps.  GORE was my introduction, then the Quick-Start Edition, then the full Big Gold Book.  Non-OGL issues aside, I felt that GORE and the Quick-Start were companions rather competitors.  They each explained BRP and provided a useful if limited game framework -- but they tackled the job differently, which helped me "get it" sooner.

[Baragei]

I have very few gripes about the BGB as it sits on the shelf, all pretty. It was brilliant in its day, and it's still a great toolkit.

The few gripes I do have are non-functional shields, wonky firearms and the fact that it's a rather uninviting read. Fix up the few shortcomings of the combat chapter, make it pop a bit more, add in some of the later games' stuff and maybe an expanded "how-to" section, and Dustin might have to come tell us again that the book sold surprisingly well.

But for the love of Cthulhu, don't change the baseline.

[Mugen]

11 hours ago, g33k said:

But I expect the issues are non-trivial, given that the French Mourneblade still seems to carry Mongoose markings...?

Though the game was originally under license from Mongoose, it seems it's not the case anymore.

This website seems to be the official one for the game (at least, according to legrog.fr), and it only says "©Michael & Linda Moorcock".

http://titam-france.fr/jeu-de-role/mournblade/

[el_octogono]

6 hours ago, Baragei said:

The few gripes I do have are non-functional shields, wonky firearms and the fact that it's a rather uninviting read.

This. Shields are almost always useless and firearms, specially burst weapons, have tedious and unrealistic damage results.

[Questbird]

9 hours ago, el_octogono said:

This. Shields are almost always useless and firearms, specially burst weapons, have tedious and unrealistic damage results.

 

Yes, everyone has to make up their own shield rules or pull them from somewhere else.

Historically, many cultures used shields in combat. Many devised the technology themselves.

Why would they have done it if shields were useless?

BRP struggles to make this clear.

[soltakss]

Many Systems, One Family.

That's how I approach the multitudes of D100 games. I use bits and bobs from all the games in my game and it is all the better for that.

I am not sure what a new version of BRP will accomplish. Would it be brought closer to RQG or closer to CoC? Would it go its own way, but more so? I can use CoC, RQG, Mythras, Revolution, OpenQuest, Renaissance or any other D100 game to handle certain genres or feels to a setting, BRP is just another flavour of that.

[seneschal]

Well, the point of the Big Gold Book was to gather together nearly 40 years of play-tested BRP rules, make them consistent, and present them in a coherent whole.  Part of that was an attempt to explain which of the many options complement each other and which ones clash, especially in regards to depicting specific genres and genre conventions.  It is a GM's book rather than something aimed at his newest player, who only wants to slay the dragon and lay the princess and doesn't care how that happens mechanically.

It was a worthwhile goal, successfully achieved for the most part due to Jason Durall's heroic efforts.  With Call of Cthulhu I can play ... Call of Cthulhu.  With the BGB I can play both  CoC and RuneQuest as long as I can hunt down setting material somewhere.  I can also whip up a Psi World game with better rules, throw together a RWBY mini-campaign to delight my daughter (write-ups for the main protagonist and a dastardly villain in the Superworld threads), or have the Green Hornet team up with Quack Kerouac to hit the road and take a bill outta crime.  Sorry, can't do that with our shiny new editions of Cthulhu and RuneQuest.  They aren't built for it.

That's why the BGB should be kept in print and cleaned up as profitable business makes that a financially reasonable possibility.

[groovyclam]

2 hours ago, seneschal said:

With Call of Cthulhu I can play ... Call of Cthulhu.  With the BGB I can play both  CoC and RuneQuest as long as I can hunt down setting material somewhere.  I can also whip up a Psi World game with better rules, throw together a RWBY mini-campaign to delight my daughter (write-ups for the main protagonist and a dastardly villain in the Superworld threads), or have the Green Hornet team up with Quack Kerouac to hit the road and take a bill outta crime.  Sorry, can't do that with our shiny new editions of Cthulhu and RuneQuest.  They aren't built for it.

I totally agree with what you say there, BUT...those sorts of RPGers/GMs are few and far between and so the sales for any new BGB would be small (although I would buy one). I think the most resource Chaosium should apply to any new BGB would be fixing errata and sort out any obviously broken mechanic ( shields has been mentioned, I don't know if there are any more ). Possibly add in new mechanics like bonus/penalty dice, success levels and opposed rolls ( as an alternative to the resistance table ), luck spending and passions.

For Chaosium to spend any more money and time on anything else like fancy new art and layout or significantly rewriting the text to make it more friendly probably wouldn't be worth the resource given the sales it would generate.

[seneschal]

Agree, and I think most of my fellow BGB fans who have posted here would, too.  We're not asking for a massive hardcover tome crammed with full-color art.  It's not that kind of book.  But cleaning up errata, including the latest rules innovations in the mix, would be a reasonable update if doing so would be profitable for Chaosium.

[Atgxtg]

On 10/15/2019 at 1:56 PM, Rick Meints said:

We are making no promises, but if we were to update the BGB, what could be improved?

NOTE: The printed BGB is available for sale still on our website, and certainly in PDF form on our website and DTRPG.

Just a thought but what if instead of being improved it could be added to? Specifically:

• A section for  GMs new to BRP to help them navigate between the myriad of choices and optional rules. Perhaps with some example applications that use various systems? Something along the lines of one page or two page game settings. Those that become popular could potentially be expanded into full supplements at a later date. You could even recreate simplified forms of pre-existing Chaosium game worlds to use BRP as an intro to other games such as RQ and, CoC. One of the reasons why experienced BRPers can do so much more with the BGB is that we've seen how the various rules have been pieced together in the past. 
• Sections could be added to include the new %-based game mechanics from CoC7, or maybe even a d20 based game mechanic such as used in Pendragon, plus maybe some guidelines for adapting rules and character stats between them all.
• Oh, and maybe none of this would require a new edition of BRP but instead could be marketed as the Basic Role Playing Companion.

[dieselpunk]

On 10/19/2019 at 8:39 AM, groovyclam said:

I totally agree with what you say there, BUT...those sorts of RPGers/GMs are few and far between and so the sales for any new BGB would be small (although I would buy one). I think the most resource Chaosium should apply to any new BGB would be fixing errata and sort out any obviously broken mechanic ( shields has been mentioned, I don't know if there are any more )

A while back I had noticed that the Encumbrance and MOV rules were incomplete. Everything other folks have written upthread would be great. I'd totally buy a cleaned up edition. I'd love to see some cleaned up art even if it's all black and white. Many of the original pieces seemed like they were scanned pencil drawings and lack contrast. 

Edited October 21, 2019 by dieselpunk

[foolcat]

I’d buy the s**t out of an updated BRP BGB line of books. 😊

Yes, it’d be GM crunch mostly, but as a GM I like having a consolidated, comprehensive rules reference at my fingertips. Especially when mixing and matching rules options to a specific setting. Which I practically do all the time. So what if I decided to use, say, M-Space (based on Mythras Imperative) with the CoC 7th Ed Advantage/Disadvantage rule? To the players, it still looks like the same old basic d100 dice roll mechanics they know well, but with an added twist; two play sessions in, they will have taken to it like ducks take to water.

If an updated BRP Rules Companion is ever going to happen, please make sure to get Hans-Christian Vortisch (of Investigator Weapons vol. 1 & 2 and GURPS Tactical Shooting fame) on board to write the chapter on historical, modern, and near-future  ballistic firearms. The guy has literally written the book already.

[rsanford]

I am not sure it makes sense to revise the BGB but if you decide to do it, I will buy it. But please do it in hard cover.

[Aycorn]

On 10/15/2019 at 10:56 AM, Rick Meints said:

We are making no promises, but if we were to update the BGB, what could be improved?

NOTE: The printed BGB is available for sale still on our website, and certainly in PDF form on our website and DTRPG.

https://swordofsorcery.blogspot.com/2017/04/i-love-brp.html

My last word on the subject.  Again.

 

[Cdr Vimes]

I'd buy an updated BGB as well.  D100 is my go to system for home-brews in all eras and settings. I'd like to see it updated to CoC7 mechanics I think.  Im currently running an 'evil' fantasy campaign using CoC7/Pulp Cthulhu with Magic from Magic World and advanced Sorcery with tweaks from the BGB as required.  It works well even though I tweaked the 'Fight Back/Dodge" mechanic to include a 'Defend' and make shields worth taking.  My players are loving it so far.

[MoonRightRomantic]

I agree that a BRP Rules Companion would be useful. Things like potency vs severity for diseases/poisons, percentile characteristics, and other innovations from BRP products released since 4th edition. Not only that, but I would love it if forgotten rules from old supplements could be referenced and revised as well, like Nephilim's potency mechanics (expanded from disease/poison to apply libraries and other things) and changing Appearance to Charisma, or RuneQuest's various spirits that could do things like storing power points, healing, causing madness or disease, etc. At least if equivalents don't already exist, do they? The BRP catalogue is extensive and difficult for me to parse.

[Ian Absentia]

3 hours ago, MoonRightRomantic said:

I agree that a BRP Rules Companion would be useful.

That is the old school Chaosium approach.  Especially for a "toolkit" rules compendium like BRP, a semi-annual "Companion" could represent the current trends in popular style of play with optional plug-in rules, including both new developments and some old treasures from the vault as suggested above.

!i!

Edited October 24, 2019 by Ian Absentia
Specificity

[Fenspar]

On 10/15/2019 at 10:56 AM, Rick Meints said:

We are making no promises, but if we were to update the BGB, what could be improved?

NOTE: The printed BGB is available for sale still on our website, and certainly in PDF form on our website and DTRPG.

Intriguing question. 

Certainly layout and artwork could be upgraded, but that's just cosmetics. Presentation could be streamlined so that there's a core of basic rules, but I like the toolbox approach and the range of options.

A few specific things that speak to my own preferences:

- I like skill category modifiers but would prefer an easier calculation, something like the way the Mongoose/OpenQuest branch simply adds Characteristic scores, or Characteristic/2. The RQ3 method or the tables given in RQG are too complex and slow.

- Magic (I'm thinking of the Blast spell) feels underpowered. I recall it's 3MP per d6 of damage, which seems a high toll, so an option for more epic fantasy magic would be nice.

- Absolutely a character sheet for at least each the main implied genres (Fantasy, SF, Horror, Supers). 

Alternatively, revise and reissue the original Magic World (the Steve Perrin and Gordon Monson version) as a standalone, light fantasy system, and add other "BRP Worlds" over time.

 

[Lloyd Dupont]

2 hours ago, Fenspar said:

- Magic (I'm thinking of the Blast spell) feels underpowered. I recall it's 3MP per d6 of damage, which seems a high toll, so an option for more epic fantasy magic would be nice.

It's one area where the rule are a bit unclear in their intention.

Remember how BRP both offer general HP or (much lower) location HP?

Well 3MP per D6 for location HP is a reasonable price. But it's expensive when playing with general HP and should be 1MP per D6.
They should amend the rule to that effect!

Edited October 28, 2019 by Lloyd Dupont

[Richard S.]

Question: I've seen a few people bring up problems with shields in this thread; what exactly are those? I haven't played using the straight BGB, and in my RQ campaigns no one used a shield, so I don't have any personal experience. Just from the quick read over I've done they seem to be alright on paper.

[Jeffrywith1e]

Reading through this thread, it doesn't seem to be explicitly said, but it sure feels like there's a BRP update coming. Is this clear and I'm slow? or is this wishful thinking?