How does BRP work for long=term advancement?

[ghelmberger]

I'm strongly considering using BRP for what is intended to be an ongoing heroic-level low fantasy game. My concern is that the system won't support advancement and development in a long-term context. The only prior experience I have with the system is running and playing Call of Cthulhu (where long-term character development isn't exactly a concern) and a few sessions of Runequest back in the day (which we didn't play long enough for development to become an issue). However, since I want characters who can be played long-term and still be developing through the end of a long-term campaign, I am concerned that characters might well plateau in the mid-term, with their weapon and other frequently used skills up around 100% and nowhere to go from there. Is this a valid concern, and what strategies can I employ to make this less of a problem?

[Charles Green]

I've run a number of long-term BRP based campaigns, and I can see where you might have this concern.

The system holds up reasonably well in long-term play, though the nature of the experience system does produce some artifacts that you'll notice as play progresses.

Early on, low skills tend to not succeed as often, but when they do, advancement comes easily. At about the 60%-70% level, this starts to reverse itself; success comes easily, but advancement tapers off and only occurs every so often. However, your chance for a special or critical success (and therefore a free advancement in that skill) also increases.

High-level combat works very differently than starting-level combat. In my experience, two characters with high weapon skills tend to trade blows and parries for some time, until someone fumbles a parry or scores a critical hit. This usually means that hgh level combats end with a single telling blow. This also results in a higher quantity of Major Wounds, and the difference between a wound that leaves a scar and one that is fatal is pretty narrow.

So, what you've notices is a concern, certainly, though it's not game-breaking by any means. Characters to hit a plateau in development at some level, but this doesn't completely stop them from advancing, it just changes the nature of the advance. There is still room to grow, as they will have other skills that they can use and increase.

Also, there are combat options for dealing with skills over 100%.

[Thalaba]

I've been running a weekly low-fantasy bronze-age RQ campaign for the last year and a half, now. When we started, character had their highest skills in the 50-60% range, a number of medium skills in the 30-40% range, and a lot of low level skills. A year and a half later I would say the original characters have a few skills approaching 90% (very rare). most midling skills in the 50-60% range, and there are still a lot of low, seldom used skills. In another year's time, I doubt we will have more than a handful of skills in the entire party above 100% - and these will be weapons skills. Whe weapon skills are over 100%, you will find that people will start dividing them into two attacks, making aimed blows, etc. so 100% still won't seem high enough.

I let the players roll for skill checks at the end of every campaign chapter when they enter a town or city (without being chased) and can relax. This works out to about every 3 or 4 sessions. They definitely look forward to making their advance rolls.

Now, I'm not sure what you mean by long term, but you can certainly keep skills from getting too high if you pace it right.

Now, having said that, there are a number of people on this board who cut their BRP teeth playing Stormbriger instead of CoC or RQ, and Stormbringer recommends players start with weapon skills over 100% and go up from there. I've heard many people here say that this is how they like to play it. So for that reason I would say that PCs crossing the 100% threshold shouldn't be too much of a concern - it's certainly playable and probably a lot of fun. Besides, there are many ways for characters to advance besides increasing their skills. My players have so far enjoyed upgrading their armour, then training up their strength so they could wear the armour, then increasing their POW so they didn't get defeated by enemy spells or spirits or curses so much. They have yet to put any concentrated effort into learning new magic.

So, to sum up:

1. It's not too difficult to keep skills from climbing too high if you pace game.

2. If some skills do go over 100%, the game is still fun and playable. Some say it's the only way to play.

3. Having skills over 100% doesn't mean an end to character advancement by any stretch.

Hope that helps!

Thalaba

[rpgstarwizard]

I wouldn't think it an issue. I have run various BRP games for long times, including a COC game for years. Even if a person goes past the 100%, they have quite a bit of playability. We ran an RQ games for a couple years and had no problem. If it is a worry, instead of allowing a skill check per success allowing it only on crits.

Edited November 15, 2009 by rpgstarwizard

[ghelmberger]

That does ease my concern considerably. I want my PCs to always look forward to advancing, but not to hit a wall. I think I can run the game breathing easier now. Thanks!

[Chaot]

... I often start PCs off with at least 100% in at least one skill...

[RMS]

I've run a couple of RQ games long term: 7 years and 3 years of regular play, respectively. As mentioned, skills continue to progress, but it does taper off. OTOH, characters can still advance if you allow skills to go over 100% and the system holds up quite well for high skills, even for a character with a 200%+ combat skill. There's a myth that the system breaks down, but it doesn't at all. With the ability to get Specials and Criticals, and in combat to do things like split attacks, those high skills all have important uses.

However, I do think in both cases that the games would have gotten a bit boring, if mechanical advancement was still the center of character advancement after that time. Instead both did move to political advancement, cult advancement, etc. as being the real center of character activities. Mechanical advancement was just a side-bonus to it.

[SDLeary]

Anyone run a long-term generational campaign with BRP, ala Great Pendragon Campaign?

SDLeary

[rust]

Anyone run a long-term generational campaign with BRP, ala Great Pendragon Campaign?

Yes, we did, several times, with a modified Call of Cthulhu system.

It worked quite well, although I learned from experience that it is prudent to

make as many non-combat skills as possible important for the player charac-

ters to distribute their experience over a wide array of skills and to award ex-

perience rolls only for success with difficult actions under especially stressful

circumstances (the "axis events" of the campaign's plot).

It also helps to offer a good "exit strategy" for the older / very experienced

player characters, for example by providing ways to turn them into some of

the setting's influential non-player characters in time to open up the "cam-

paign slots" for the younger and less experienced generation of player cha-

racters.

[tedopon]

Anyone run a long-term generational campaign with BRP, ala Great Pendragon Campaign?

SDLeary

No, but I did run a time travel campaign once where the PCs lost some of their abilities each time they altered reality. They each became _really_ good at just a few things after they kept jumping back and forth. Conversely, they became _really_ bad at most things.

[RosenMcStern]

I never found character advancement "too fast" in BRP. In fact, I had the opposite problem - high experience characters not meeting the skill requirements for Rune Lord because they were stuck at 85% and unable to succeed in their experience check. When I want to make an exciting campaign, I usually increase the experience increase to 2d4 to speed things up.

The only real problem with high level skills was the "parry blocks AP in damage" rule, which required that you actually failed your parry to break through, if you had a minimally decent parrying weapon. This problem is no longer there now, and in a fight between two 100% opponents, a blow lands on target once in three rounds on average. So you can plan and run a high level campaign without any fear.

Just remember that in a high level campaign things will turn into a matter of social relationship, sooner or later. As BRP still lacks an established mechanics for these (you can find somehing in RuneQuest, but that's all), you have to plan in advance how you will handle this in play.

[ghelmberger]

I'm actually pretty solid on how I intend to handle social relationships and advancement. I'm going to use a slight modification of the Allegiance system to represent favor with various power blocs. I'm still working out the details, but the idea is that by allying one's self strongly with a given social entity, one can derive both tangible and intangible benefits. Each different power bloc will grant slightly different benefits, and in some cases gaining favor with one will mean losing favor with its enemy. So I'm pretty sure about how I'll be able to incorporate that element right from the start.

[RosenMcStern]

If you are successful in this, please post a report here. This is the only area where BRP is really lacking at the moment, and it is a shame because it is a pretty mature system under all other aspects. The Allegiance system is easy and workable, I was a bit disappointed when I discovered that Jason had not extended it to mundane relationships.

[Thalaba]

Yes, I'd like to see this too, if you don't mind - it sounds intrigueing.

[ghelmberger]

If you are successful in this, please post a report here. This is the only area where BRP is really lacking at the moment, and it is a shame because it is a pretty mature system under all other aspects. The Allegiance system is easy and workable, I was a bit disappointed when I discovered that Jason had not extended it to mundane relationships.

I certainly will do that. In fact I hope to use these boards as a sounding...well, board, I suppose, as I go forward. I've been GMing different games for 30 years but I'm still relatively inexperienced in BRP, so the more eyes on things as the develop, the better.

This is especially true given that I want to use this game as the subject of an actual play podcast and I'd rather not humiliate myself any more than I usually do when I run a game.

[Nightshade]

I never found character advancement "too fast" in BRP. In fact, I had the opposite problem - high experience characters not meeting the skill requirements for Rune Lord because they were stuck at 85% and unable to succeed in their experience check. When I want to make an exciting campaign, I usually increase the experience increase to 2d4 to speed things up.

I agree; BRP style games have always been pretty self-regulating here, though the nature of the semi-random advancement can produce occasional odd artifacts (we had a player in the old RQ2 days who managed to accumulate 150% Defense in the days when this required rolling INT as a percentage and it was a subtractor that usually started in the 5-15% range; and this was in a group with multiple GMs, and where we had early on decided to have the GMs roll advancement rolls. Consulting with my fellow GMs, no one could recall this character every having failed a Defense advancement check...)

[SDLeary]

I'm actually pretty solid on how I intend to handle social relationships and advancement. I'm going to use a slight modification of the Allegiance system to represent favor with various power blocs. I'm still working out the details, but the idea is that by allying one's self strongly with a given social entity, one can derive both tangible and intangible benefits. Each different power bloc will grant slightly different benefits, and in some cases gaining favor with one will mean losing favor with its enemy. So I'm pretty sure about how I'll be able to incorporate that element right from the start.

If you have access, you might want to look in two places for additional ideas. Rod's Classic Fantasy monograph, which has modeled "Alignment" using the Allegiance system, giving tangible benefits for having scores above a set value.

The second it Pendragon. The Passions system is similar and already designed for social relationships.

SDLeary

[ghelmberger]

If you have access, you might want to look in two places for additional ideas. Rod's Classic Fantasy monograph, which has modeled "Alignment" using the Allegiance system, giving tangible benefits for having scores above a set value.

The second it Pendragon. The Passions system is similar and already designed for social relationships.

SDLeary

I did just purchase Classic Fantasy, and I did like how he modeled that. I was going to be looking at Pendragon anyway, because if I remember correctly it also had some sort of mechanism for tracking glory or honor or something, and I'm looking at a very heroic-style game where glory is something the PCs actively compete for. Now I just need to find my Pendragon book...

[SDLeary]

The only real problem with high level skills was the "parry blocks AP in damage" rule, which required that you actually failed your parry to break through, if you had a minimally decent parrying weapon. This problem is no longer there now, and in a fight between two 100% opponents, a blow lands on target once in three rounds on average. So you can plan and run a high level campaign without any fear.

I'd love to hear, either thru PM or another thread, why you found the "Parry blocks AP in damage" rule an issue. Seems a bit more accurate in the way shields work than the current "Parry blocks all" method.

SDLeary

[rust]

Just remember that in a high level campaign things will turn into a matter of social relationship, sooner or later. As BRP still lacks an established mechanics for these (you can find somehing in RuneQuest, but that's all), you have to plan in advance how you will handle this in play.

Yes, I think Mongoose Runequest's "Guilds, Factions & Cults" and - for the

very high social levels - "Empires" have some interesting and useful ideas

when it comes to player characters and the social framework of a setting.

[Nightshade]

I'd love to hear, either thru PM or another thread, why you found the "Parry blocks AP in damage" rule an issue. Seems a bit more accurate in the way shields work than the current "Parry blocks all" method.

SDLeary

I won't speak for him, but it could pretty much lead to an almost indefinite stalemate; for example, if you're using a medium shield (usually was around 12 AP in RQ) and a broadsword (1D8+1) with a D4 damage bonus (total average about 8, maximum only 13), unless your magical augmentation pushed it up considerably, you could spend a long time not doing anything to each other. It could turn, essentially, into the wait for the crit, and if the dice weren't cooperative...

The probabilities of getting at least one step lower on the comparative success system is much greater, even at very high levels. It doesn't as strongly favor the person with the better magic enhancement on their weapon or shield, to boot.

[ghelmberger]

Yes, I think Mongoose Runequest's "Guilds, Factions & Cults" and - for the

very high social levels - "Empires" have some interesting and useful ideas

when it comes to player characters and the social framework of a setting.

Interesting, I will take a look at that. Can you give me some hints about what they suggest?

[rust]

Interesting, I will take a look at that. Can you give me some hints about what they suggest?

"Empires" treats nations / states and "Guilds, Factions & Cults" treats orga-

nizations like characters, with characteristics and skills and rules for develop-

ment and important events.

One could use the books to "roleplay" a nation or an economic / political / re-

ligious organization, but the more interesting parts are those that connect

this "metagame level" with the lives of the player characters.

For example, "Empires" contains rules to play the life of a noble, and "Guilds,

Factions & Cults" has rules about what the organizations can provide to the

player characters - and what they expect their members to do for them.

I do not use the Mongoose Runequest rules (it is "BRP-enriched Call of Cthul-

hu" for me), but the rules from these two books are very easy to modify for

BRP or any BRP "clone".

Both books can be had as PDFs:

RuneQuest Empires - Mongoose | DriveThruRPG.com

Guilds, Factions & Cults - Mongoose | DriveThruRPG.com

[ghelmberger]

"Empires" treats nations / states and "Guilds, Factions & Cults" treats orga-

nizations like characters, with characteristics and skills and rules for develop-

ment and important events.

One could use the books to "roleplay" a nation or an economic / political / re-

ligious organization, but the more interesting parts are those that connect

this "metagame level" with the lives of the player characters.

For example, "Empires" contains rules to play the life of a noble, and "Guilds,

Factions & Cults" has rules about what the organizations can provide to the

player characters - and what they expect their members to do for them.

I do not use the Mongoose Runequest rules (it is "BRP-enriched Call of Cthul-

hu" for me), but the rules from these two books are very easy to modify for

BRP or any BRP "clone".

Both books can be had as PDFs:

RuneQuest Empires - Mongoose | DriveThruRPG.com

Guilds, Factions & Cults - Mongoose | DriveThruRPG.com

Ah, interesting! I'll check those out and mine them for ideas.

[Agentorange]

I actually own both those books and I have to say they're both pretty good. Eminently adaptable to any BRP based game with a bit of jiggling around.