Announcing the Basic Roleplaying System Reference Document and Open Game License

[Warframe44]

On 3/27/2020 at 5:59 AM, Jeff said:

If it is not Prohibited Content then you are free to create your own derivative work. It isn't particularly limited unless you are trying to reskin RQG, Cthulhu, or Pendragon.

This is a message we're trying to get across on reddit, that the new OGL is, well, amazing. 

 

Since posting this though, Toxandia has been released   I haven't read it yet but it's a fantasy game built using BRP OGL. Very exciting!

[g33k]

On 8/12/2020 at 10:45 PM, smiorgan said:

... does not go overboard to emulate D&D in BRP as Classic Fantasy did ...

I never thought of CF as "going overboard."

D&D emulation (within the skill-centric mechanics of BRP) was the entire point of CF!

As well to say that RQG "goes overboard with all that Glorantha," or CoC goes overboard with Cthu...  well, OK; technically speaking, ANY of the Great Old Ones is too much.

But you know what I mean!

 

Still... this looks like a worthy addition to the BRP family!!!

[smiorgan]

4 hours ago, g33k said:

I never thought of CF as "going overboard."

D&D emulation (within the skill-centric mechanics of BRP) was the entire point of CF!

Fair enough. That's probably why I'm not that interested in CF. Its design goal does not appeal to me. I like the idea of a BRP game that takes some thematic inspiration from D&D, that you can use to run the kind of fantasy adventures you run in D&D, even containing some nods to D&D mechanics, but not a fully fledged d100 D&D emulator.  At that point, I just prefer to play D&D.

So, in the end it's just that Toxandria is closer to my preferences than CF.

 

[g33k]

5 hours ago, smiorgan said:

Fair enough. That's probably why I'm not that interested in CF. Its design goal does not appeal to me. I like the idea of a BRP game that takes some thematic inspiration from D&D, that you can use to run the kind of fantasy adventures you run in D&D, even containing some nods to D&D mechanics, but not a fully fledged d100 D&D emulator.  At that point, I just prefer to play D&D ...

I don't quite consider it an "emulator" ...  but I can't call that an "incorrect" assessment, either!  It uses the BRP/d100 & d100 per-skill advancement mechanism, instead of D&D's "XP" abstraction.  Then in D&D, where you earn "enough" XP to level-up, you unlock new levels of skill, new spell-levels, &c... whereas in CF when you achieve the skills defined as matching the new "Rank" (something very like the necessity of some specific Skills needed to become Rune-Level in RQ), then you're ALREADY skilled-up, but you unlock new levels of spell & other "Special Abilities."  It is, frankly, the kind of brilliant innovation that makes for an "oh, of course! it's so simple!" experience looking at it after the fact, from the outside.

The thing is:  it allows you to run all those old AD&D modules.  Mostly, run as-written, with a simple adapt/adjust step on the fly, at the table.  That gives you a *LOT* of content!

And it's all "classic" content, old-school AD&D.  The core customer-base, AFAIK, are those folks who cut their teeth on AD&D, back in the day, and want to recover the "flavor" of those old modules (with a more-rational rules basis).  I think there's another substantial portion of customers who are newer players interested in those legendary "early days" games, and wanting to go back to see "what's all the fuss about."   And (I suspect) there's also a non-trivial number of BRP/Mythras fans who relish the irony of retro-porting their superior rules and assimilating the D&D content (these may actually be the LARGEST single group)...  And some folk who partake of more than one of these groups.

 

But we're straying off on a distant tangent from the BRP SRD/OGL topic (and this is an "official" thread, not rando-forum-content) so... if you're interested in further chat on this, shall we move to PM, or over to the Mythras forum?

I honestly wish Rod had stayed with BRP when he took his CF product beyond the "monograph" stage!

Not that I don't think Mythras is a very-fine product... but I couldn't manage to sell that ruleset to my group, back in the RQ6 era when Chaosium wasn't cranking out fine content like they are today.

[Jakob]

55 minutes ago, g33k said:

It is, frankly, the kind of brilliant innovation that makes for an "oh, of course! it's so simple!" experience looking at it after the fact, from the outside.

 

Nothing against CF and Mythras, but I'm pretty sure that that in itself is not an innovation; I have a strong feeling that I've been playing several RPGs in my youth that used the "You level up by raising your skills" method. Okay, the only one I can name now is the German RPG Midgard (which has been doing it like that since the early 80s, I think), but there must have been more ...?

[Prinz Slasar]

15 hours ago, Jakob said:

Nothing against CF and Mythras, but I'm pretty sure that that in itself is not an innovation; I have a strong feeling that I've been playing several RPGs in my youth that used the "You level up by raising your skills" method.

Yes, this concept is as old as RuneQuest itself (the term Rune-Level says it) and Mythras, which is the 6. Edition of RQ, uses this idea, too (but in a more elaborate way). The whole chapter 14 in the CRB is a hidden "Level system" - especially applied to the Magic Rules.
CLASSIC FANTASY, the D100-emulator of (A-)DnD, utilizes this system again but much more direct and visible.

[g33k]

On 9/21/2020 at 9:44 AM, Jakob said:

Nothing against CF and Mythras, but I'm pretty sure that that in itself is not an innovation...

12 hours ago, Prinz Slasar said:

Yes, this concept is as old as RuneQuest itself (the term Rune-Level says it)

 

It's the notion of formalizing a "class and level" system (specifically, AD&D's (more or less)) as specific ranks of specific skills, and then unlocking a sequence of higher and higher-level "special" abilities (specifically, AD&D's (more or less)).  You can "multi-class" by checking & advancing THOSE skills (plus the in-character / RP "fluff" of finding tutors/etc).

Maybe some other game DID do that sort of thing...?  But I know of none that did the D&Desque class/level centricity via the inherently class-less / level-less mechanics of the BRP family.

[Mugen]

I don't know if that was discussed, but the official rule for skill opposition has a very problematic line :

https://brp.chaosium.com/basic-roleplaying/3-0-system/3-3-skill-vs-skill/

"If the rolls are successful and tied (same quality of result), the character with the highest skill rating is successful."

That seems a very unfair advantage for higher skills.
For instance, a character with skill 91 has ~78% chance to beat another with skill 90, which seems a lot considering such a small difference.

EDIT: oh, there was more details below, and the second part of the rule says successes cancel each other, or that the GM can chose whatever he wants...
That's confusing.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Mugen

[DreadDomain]

10 hours ago, Mugen said:

"If the rolls are successful and tied (same quality of result), the character with the highest skill rating is successful."

It's probably just a shortcut to something that is perceived to be easier (it isn't). Personally I prefer a tie to be a tie when it makes sense or highest roll to win when a ties doesn't make sense.

Different question, have we seen any pick up on the SRD? I am only aware of Toxandria so far. Is the number of release (potentially just 1) after 8-9 months commensurate with expectations? If not, why is that? What are the roadblocks that need to be cleared by Chaosium.

Maybe the answer is that nobody is interested in BRP.  I would be extremely surprised by this (and would make me sad). Miskatonic and Jonstown had both quite a good pick-up.

 

[Mugen]

11 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

Different question, have we seen any pick up on the SRD? I am only aware of Toxandria so far. Is the number of release (potentially just 1) after 8-9 months commensurate with expectations? If not, why is that? What are the roadblocks that need to be cleared by Chaosium.

Maybe the answer is that nobody is interested in BRP.  I would be extremely surprised by this (and would make me sad). Miskatonic and Jonstown had both quite a good pick-up.

It's surely in part due to the fact the BRP license is not really an OGL license, contrarily to other similar and more successful licenses, such as FATE or d20 (either 3e or 5e).

"Alternative versions" of BRP, such as Delta Green, Mythras, OpenQuest, RD100 or Renaissance shows the system itself is still appreciated.

[g33k]

On 11/16/2020 at 1:52 AM, Mugen said:

I don't know if that was discussed, but the official rule for skill opposition has a very problematic line :

https://brp.chaosium.com/basic-roleplaying/3-0-system/3-3-skill-vs-skill/

"If the rolls are successful and tied (same quality of result), the character with the highest skill rating is successful."

That seems a very unfair advantage for higher skills.
For instance, a character with skill 91 has ~78% chance to beat another with skill 90, which seems a lot considering such a small difference.

???

I'm pretty sure your probabilities are miscalculated there...  Your gut-check (that it "seems a lot") is correct.

[Mugen]

13 hours ago, g33k said:

???

I'm pretty sure your probabilities are miscalculated there...  Your gut-check (that it "seems a lot") is correct.

Well, Mr 90 wins against Mr 91 in the following cases :

-He rolls a success and Mr91 fails => .9*.09 = .081
-He rolls a special and Mr 91 rolls a success or a fail =>.18*.82 = .1476

So, a total 22,86% chance of success.

Considering there's a .009 propbability that both fail, it means Mr 91 has a probability of 1-.2286-.009 = .7705 chance of success.

So, yes, it's closer to 77 than 78, you're right.

EDIT: Note that when I wrote this, I didn't check the rest of the text, which makes ties impossible.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Mugen

[Kabouter Games]

Sorry for the thread necromancy, y'all. I just found this thread and thought I'd peek in to thank everyone for your kind words and constructive criticisms. If you have any questions about Toxandria, you can always ask! 

If you like print books, I'm waiting for the proofs now; provided everything looks good, there'll be a softcover print version available in Q1 2021.

Cheers,

R P Davis

Kabouter Games

[Kabouter Games]

For those of you who were looking for a print version, when I said Q1 2021, I really meant "the tail end of 2020." 😄 

Because you've waited so patiently, here's a discount order link: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?discount=98085d5c24

Enjoy! I look forward to hearing what you think! 

[DreadDomain]

On 12/31/2020 at 1:33 AM, Kabouter Games said:

For those of you who were looking for a print version, when I said Q1 2021, I really meant "the tail end of 2020." 😄 

Because you've waited so patiently, here's a discount order link: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?discount=98085d5c24

Enjoy! I look forward to hearing what you think! 

And physical copy... ordered

[rsanford]

On 12/30/2020 at 9:33 AM, Kabouter Games said:

For those of you who were looking for a print version, when I said Q1 2021, I really meant "the tail end of 2020." 😄 

Because you've waited so patiently, here's a discount order link: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?discount=98085d5c24

Enjoy! I look forward to hearing what you think! 

Already ordered!

[Kabouter Games]

Thank you both! Happy 2021!

Best, 

Bob

[Baphomet69]

I see I’m dabbling in a bit of necromancy here, but I’m confused. Can the BGB (the rules portions) not be used as the SRD? If not, which parts can/cannot? The SRD is missing a LOT of the necessary systems.

Or is this all moot since they are joining ORC? Chaosium *is* still joining ORC I hope?

[SDLeary]

7 hours ago, Baphomet69 said:

I see I’m dabbling in a bit of necromancy here, but I’m confused. Can the BGB (the rules portions) not be used as the SRD? If not, which parts can/cannot? The SRD is missing a LOT of the necessary systems.

Or is this all moot since they are joining ORC? Chaosium *is* still joining ORC I hope?

I am not a Chaoisum employee, but as it stands at the moment, you must follow the stipulations in the SRD. The rules in the BGB haven NOT been designated Open Content.

SDLeary

[CussaMitre]

@Baphomet69as announced in January 29th, that the new version of BRP got a higher priority because of the OGL issue.
 

 

[SDLeary]

4 hours ago, CussaMitre said:

@Baphomet69as announced in January 29th, that the new version of BRP got a higher priority because of the OGL issue.
 

 

Yup, saw the post when it came out. Unfortunately, until (if) a new document is published by Chaosium, the current SRD and license stands.

SDLeary

[CussaMitre]

18 hours ago, SDLeary said:

Yup, saw the post when it came out. Unfortunately, until (if) a new document is published by Chaosium, the current SRD and license stands.

SDLeary

Sure! I just mentioned that because maybe he can do the same approach I am doing: creating all the content that is system agnostic (story, scenary, lore) and leaving the rules to be inserted later when they release a new version.

 

Cussa

Edited February 22, 2023 by CussaMitre

[Nerun]

With the new BRP:UGE released under ORC License, what happens to BRP OGL? BRP OGL was just 23 pages, never liked that. And it was very restrictive. I always thought it was a catch to avoid competition.

[Ravenheart87]

It's a separate license. It's still there. You can use it that if you wish so, but BRP+ORC seems a way better deal.

[MOB]

6 hours ago, Nerun said:

With the new BRP:UGE released under ORC License, what happens to BRP OGL?

Nothing. It is not going to be rescinded or invalidated, or whatever.