How Could BRP Be More Popular...?

[Mister Apocalypse]

The player characters can do whatever a player character could do during

the period.

If one simply ignores the Mythos altogether, Call of Cthulhu is an excellent

"BRP Gaslight", "BRP 1920" or "BRP Now", with all the gaming opportunities of

the historical period between the Victorian Age and today.

Now that I "get". Generally we used to have the most fun when we were playing adventures that had nothing or little to do with the Mythos.

The Mythos, going insane and all that stuff is just one way to play CoC, it

can just as well be exploring Dark Africa, running guns to Latin America,

tramp trading in the South Sea or searching for Jack the Ripper - you name

it, CoC does it.

It seems to me that the "just one way to play" is the way that they expect you to play and the way that the adventures are written for. It looks to me that if you are not going to use the Mythos much, BRP will probably let you do as much and more.

Edited December 21, 2009 by Mister Apocalypse

[Mister Apocalypse]

They investigate mysteries.

The fun comes from discovering answers and digging deeper into those mysteries - which can then frequently lead to death or insanity, in an absurdly nihilistic and futile manner, which can also be fun for the shock value.

It is a kind of like an exercise in existentialism. Lovecraft's universe is very existentialist.

I just don't get it. I can find lots of nihilistic and futile things to do in the real world. When I play a game I want do do something that isn't either. But then, I could never figure out why people who thought that the Young Kingdoms was "too depressing" would gleefully play Cthulhu.

There are things man was not meant to know.

There are games man does not have to play. :confused:

Sorry, but if they want my money, they need to give me a reason to bother. As far as I can tell, playing Cthulhu is like being a damage control party on the Titianic, stumbling about in the dark, with only a thimble to use to bail water.

BTW in high school I had a Champions character named Mr Apocalypse, kind of a human torch, night crawler mix with a little bit of the Tick thrown in (ok, a lot of the Tick, I never could take superhero games too seriously).

Seems like a better name for a villain. Imagine what the ordinary folk would thing if they heard that Mr. Apocalypse and Major Disaster were coming to rescue them. :eek:

I grabbed the moniker to relive mounting tensions on this forum about the world coming to end when someone in particular reaches 2,000 posts. I plan to revert to my alter ego just as soon as some SAN score go up a bit.

P.S> I am not try to bash anyone choice of RPG or anything. I just don't understand why anyone would want to play CoC. It just seems frustrating and pointless.

[rust]

It looks to me that if you are not going to use the Mythos much, BRP will probably let you do as much and more.

True, of course. However, for those players who were interested both in mo-

dern historical or pseudo-historical settings and in the BRP system, Call of

Cthulhu was the only available supported system, and it usually also had by

far the best researched supplements - and this has not really changed yet.

For example, if you want to play something like "Casablanca", the "Secrets

of Morocco" supplement is the best setting material you can get, and if you

want to send your Victorian adventurer into the Himalaya, nothing beats "My-

steries of Tibet" when it comes to details about the local culture.

This combination of system and supplements has convinced many players to

use Call of Cthulhu as their favourite "modern world game" while ignoring the

Mythos part of it.

And I think that many authors of Call of Cthulhu supplements were well awa-

re of this, because the Mythos stuff is often just added to the end of an

otherwise perfectly "non-cthulhoid" setting description.

[Mister Apocalypse]

Hm, that reminds me of how I bought a few CoC source books for use in other Modern Day RPGs. Ignore the occasional Deep One, and Bermuda Triangle is the best RPG resource covering the Caribbean.

[Toadmaster]

In case the joke went over your head (I'm guessing not a Lovecraft fan), one of the running themes within the mythos is there are things men should not know, learning of them drives one insane.

In fairness to CoC in my experience the insanity bit gets overstated by those who don't play the game or only have a few experiences with a bad GM. In most of the games I've played in insanity is a threat that keeps you from delving any further than needed into forbidden texts.

Generally if the PCs actually go up against a greater mythos creature it is because they blew it somewhere and missed the opportunity to stop the evil cultests from summoning a major mythos baddy or similar. A GM intentionally putting the group physically up against Cthulhu or one of his ilk has pretty much decided to start a new game. The regular use of major mythos creatures is essentially letting James Bond cut the wrong wire while disarming a nuke.

The common suggestion that CoC is just about killing PCs or driving them insane is kind of like condemning D&D because some GMs don't see anything wrong with forcing 1st level characters into situations where they have to fight ancient red dragons every week.

Like some of the others some of my best games were more of a lost worlds / Raiders of the Lost Ark setting with only occasional mythos involvement.

Edited December 21, 2009 by Toadmaster

[seneschal]

Charlie's Angels: Full Shoggoth?

[Guest Vile Traveller]

In fairness to CoC in my experience the insanity bit gets overstated by those who don't play the game or only have a few experiences with a bad GM.

I agree, similar to the oft-repeated joke about how people always die in Traveller character generation. The big nasties in Cthulhu are essentially the same as gods in a low fantasy game - how often would PCs go up against those? In my experience, CoC is mainly about discovering what's really going on, rather than actually taking down Great Old Ones.

I also second the use of CoC material for straight adventure gaming - the supplements provide a lot of useful background material even if you ignore the Mythos portions. Case in point is Cthulhu Rising, which works very well as an Aliens RPG if you take out the supernatural elements.

I've spent many a happy hour playing between-the-wars Biggles adventures using the 1920s and 30s source material.

[Mechashef]

I agree that CoC scenarios are amongst the most well researched historical type scenarios I've seen for any game.

My younger brother used to play D&D in the library at school, but some teacher brought in one of those pamphlets by the anti D&D loonies and they were banned from playing it.

They then swapped to CoC. As they could argue it is based on the writings of a famous author, they were allowed to play it.

Ironically, I think that if you were going to get immersed in a rpg, believe it's real and go postal, then you are more likely to believe in the pseudo-real CoC mythos instead of the clearly fantasy D&D!

[Mister Apocalypse]

In case the joke went over your head (I'm guessing not a Lovecraft fan), one of the running themes within the mythos is there are things men should not know, learning of them drives one insane.

I got it. But I don't think that it makes for a good RPG. In my own experience, the most successful character I even saw, was a character I had who never read a mythos book, and somehow managed to avoid a direct encounter with anything "unnautural". I think he saw something like a Mi-Go or Byakhee once, but it was dark, and two barrels from a Holland & Holand Nitro Express didn't leave it much fight.

It is sort of a sore spot with the GM that such a character did so much better than all the investigators.

In fairness to CoC in my experience the insanity bit gets overstated by those who don't play the game or only have a few experiences with a bad GM. In most of the games I've played in insanity is a threat that keeps you from delving any further than needed into forbidden texts.

I've played the game. Our GM used to run CoC for years. Thje thing is-

1)see a nasty make a SAN roll and loose some SAN (most creatures cause some loss even when you make the roll)

2)read a tome in order to get an idea of what is going on, loose some SAN. Not that the Mythos knowledge will do investigators much good.

Generally if the PCs actually go up against a greater mythos creature it is because they blew it somewhere and missed the opportunity to stop the evil cultests from summoning a major mythos baddy or similar. A GM intentionally putting the group physically up against Cthulhu or one of his ilk has pretty much decided to start a new game. The regular use of major mythos creatures is essentially letting James Bond cut the wrong wire while disarming a nuke.

Except with CoC, sooner or later the "stars will be right and the "nuke" is going to go off anyway. So anything the PCs do, in the long run, doesn't matter.

As for the "minor" mythos creatures, all are more powerful than humans are many are either invulnerable to conventional weapons or highly resistant.

The common suggestion that CoC is just about killing PCs or driving them insane is kind of like condemning D&D because some GMs don't see anything wrong with forcing 1st level characters into situations where they have to fight ancient red dragons every week.

Except in D&D every monster isn't as tough or tougher than the PCs, and with experience a PC can take down a red dragon. Also D&D doesn't put the player into things "blind". They usually know what a dragon is and that they should avoid them. In CoC the investigators typically are encounter new and unknown horrors, with some of the group spazzing out of freezing up at the crucial moment.

I think most of the surviros are the ones who ran while they buddies plied "feed the shoggoth."

Like some of the others some of my best games were more of a lost worlds / Raiders of the Lost Ark setting with only occasional mythos involvement.

I'm starting to think that of most the people who play I think that it proves my argument. It's not a merit of the game, but a solution for dealing with a flaw. I don't consider such groups to be playing CoC so much as using the underlying BRP system for a modern (or nearly modern) RPG.

I's like someone running a Superworld campaign, sans superpowers, and saying what a great game it is.

[Akrasia]

I am not sure that debating the merits of CoC is relevant to this thread. (And, of course, I'm no fan of seeing one of my favourite games piled upon. )

The fact is, for whatever reason, Call of Cthulhu is popular.

The question is how to make non-CoC BRP more popular.

Personally, I think that something like a 'CoC' approach would be best. I'm repeating myself now, I know, but I think that a 'complete' BRP fantasy rulebook (perhaps CF will be this) and a 'complete' BRP science-fiction rulebook -- both 'complete' in the same way that the core CoC rulebook is (i.e., self-sufficient for playing the game) -- is the way to go.

[frogspawner]

The fact is, for whatever reason, Call of Cthulhu is popular.

The question is how to make non-CoC BRP more popular.

Personally, I think that something like a 'CoC' approach would be best. I'm repeating myself now, I know, but I think that a 'complete' BRP fantasy rulebook (perhaps CF will be this) and a 'complete' BRP science-fiction rulebook -- both 'complete' in the same way that the core CoC rulebook is (i.e., self-sufficient for playing the game) -- is the way to go.

So BRP should be promoted as "the CoC without Cthulhu"? "Tired of going insane and being eaten by slimy tentacled horrors from beyond? Play BRP!" Maybe a range of genre-specific offerings, all named "Call Of..." something evoking their genre (and preferably beginning with C). Hmm, "Call of Classic Fantasy", and similar "Call of Classic ..."s, might fit the bill.

Edited December 22, 2009 by frogspawner
attached pic

[rust]

So BRP should be promoted as "the CoC without Cthulhu"?

Well, actually ... :shocked:

However, CoC obviously is the BRP version that does something right, so we

should take a look at it, and the line "compatible with Call of Cthulhu" could

well influence sales of BRP material over here.

On the other hand, BRP supplements like Rome - well researched and well pre-

sented - are as good as the CoC supplements and cover the historical genre

without having to mention the Mythos, so the main problem here is probably

to tell the potential customers that they do exist.

[lawrence.whitaker]

We've reached 59 pages of discussion and I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned conventions and demo games. Apologies if they have; I haven't read every post in this thread.

To my mind, the best way of making BRP more popular and accessible is to get out there and demo it at cons, large and small, and at FLGSs. Does anyone remember SJG's Men in Black? Or the Kult of Keepers? Or Mongoose Infantry? These teams of GMs went all-out to take the different games, systems and settings to conventions, games nights and so on, run lots of different scenarios, all designed to show case the rules and offer a great gaming experience. The result is that word spreads, people play the game and have its nuances taught, and experience the setting(s) first-hand, instructed by experts. If the job is done right, they become converts, rush off to the trade stand, and buy the core rules.

I don't think that any single approach is going to work on its own. A setting can be hugely innovative/accurate, whatever... but its exposure to play that works the best. Even at cons like Continuum and Eternal Con/Tentacles, there are players who have never experienced BRP but go to these events to game. If games in their droves are offered, then you have a better chance of increasing its popularity.

At Continuum, for example, we regularly host Kult of Keepers, D101 and Smart Party. These are hard-core GMs who will run games ad-infinitum, but are always in demand and help push people to the benefits of the system. It works.

BRP Central clearly has a whole stack of talent who can help facilitate this approach. I'd be happy to arrange for Continuum to have a dedicated BRP Demo slot, with a gaming area set aside, for a bunch of GMs who wanted to come along and do that demoing. But there needs to be some co-ordination. Someone needs to organise the group, identify cons and local gaming nights, and then help rally the cadre of GMs to go out and spread the word. I'm sure Chaosium would offer some GM support if approached.

So come on BRP Central... get some kind of act together and propel this thing. Only by getting out there, away from this board, and showcasing the game you love will you really increase its popularity: Show, Don't Tell...

[threedeesix]

I'm starting to think that of most the people who play I think that it proves my argument. It's not a merit of the game, but a solution for dealing with a flaw. I don't consider such groups to be playing CoC so much as using the underlying BRP system for a modern (or nearly modern) RPG.

I's like someone running a Superworld campaign, sans superpowers, and saying what a great game it is.

When I mentioned that I do not play COC as part of the mythos, and instead run "normal" horror stuff with it, it wasn't because I saw any type of flaw in the system. It's because I have never bothered to read any Lovecraft. I use all of the other elements of the game to full effect. I have never had a character go totally insane, however I have had them suffer numerous bouts of temporary insanity. There seem to me to be as many ways to gain sanity as their is to lose it.

I see COC as a horror game that comes packaged with the Lovecraft Mythos as it's setting in the same way I see RQ1 and RQ2 as a fantasy game that came packaged with Glorantha as its setting. I never cared for Glorantha either and instead used RQ for numerous other settings. I don't see that as proving anyone's argument that RQ is a flawed game.

Rod

[Mister Apocalypse]

I am not sure that debating the merits of CoC is relevant to this thread. (And, of course, I'm no fan of seeing one of my favourite games piled upon. )

I think it is entirely relevant, because...

The fact is, for whatever reason, Call of Cthulhu is popular.

And...

The question is how to make non-CoC BRP more popular.

So unless we know the reason why CoC is popular, we can't know if it would apply to BRP, or even how to apply it.

Personally, I think that something like a 'CoC' approach would be best. I'm repeating myself now, I know, but I think that a 'complete' BRP fantasy rulebook (perhaps CF will be this) and a 'complete' BRP science-fiction rulebook -- both 'complete' in the same way that the core CoC rulebook is (i.e., self-sufficient for playing the game) -- is the way to go.

Probably not a bad idea, but I doubt Chasoium is going to go with that approach, since it would essentially mean abandoning the BRP core book format in favor of multiple books.A neat compromise would be if they sold bundled packages. Something like gettig a "semi-complete" sourcebook along with the BRP Core rules.

I'm a bit leery of the "it's CoC without the Mythos" approach. While that might attract some CoC players, it will also alienate some CoC players who won't want to see their game "stripped down". Also, a strong emphasis on CoC will discourage those who dislike CoC.

I think BRP needs to be promoted on it's own merits. What makes that tough is that it's merits don't make it stand apart from the crowd as much today as in years past. In fact, BRP actually lacks some of the merits of it's predecessors. I doesn't have the richly detailed settings that RQ and CoC have. That will (hopefully) change over time, but at this point in time, it doesn't have that.

[lawrence.whitaker]

What's made CoC popular is as follows:

1. An accessible setting that's easy to relate to (1920s originally, and our world)

2. Horror as the backdrop and the uneasy nihilism that hooks even non-roleplayers into a game, scares 'em rigid, and wants them wanting more

3. A trimmed-down version of BRP that can be contained on one side of a character sheet and is easy and fast to implement.

What's kept it popular...

4. Constant product support

5. Some of the most innovative supplements out there (Masks of Nyarlathotep being the standout example)

6. The accessibility of the setting and system

7. No serious competition in this kind of horror-investigation field

8. Dedicated GMs, like Kult of Keepers, who have gone out there and proselytised.

I doubt that you'll replicate this success template, as simple as it is. In this respect, CoC is somewhat unique. Its still one of my favourite ways of introducing new players to roleplaying, but I don't think that either a fantasy or SF setting is going to work in the same way. Its a very crowded market; CoC worked because it was unique when it was launched; there really was nothing like it out there. These days - there's lots of horror RPGs (although nothing does it as well as CoC).

I'll come back to my earlier post. If you want to make BRP, as a rule set, popular, don't just rely on that killer setting book or trying to replicate CoC's success and popularity. There are tons of killer settings books out there, and the things that made CoC unique when launched have long-passed and can't easily be recaptured.

Instead, we need people running games, show casing the rules, introducing new players, giving them copies of the Quick Start, running simple, fun, engaging and accessible adventures, whatever the setting, to proselytise. What you want is for a group of players who've visited a con, or been to a demo session at their FLGS, to buy the rules or take the quickstart back to their regular group and say 'hey, this was awesome. Let's play some more. We know how to do it.'

[Trifletraxor]

I got it. But I don't think that it makes for a good RPG.

But it does. Not for you, but for enough people to make CoC the classic BRP game that most people have heard about. More people know about CoC than RQ.

To my mind, the best way of making BRP more popular and accessible is to get out there and demo it at cons, large and small, and at FLGSs.

I'll probably GM a session at Eternal Con and Continuum.

SGL.

[frogspawner]

... the line "compatible with Call of Cthulhu" could well influence sales of BRP material over here.

On the other hand, BRP supplements like Rome ... the main problem here is probably to tell the potential customers that they do exist.

'Leveraging' the CoC line could be a good way to get shelf-space in FLGSs - though perhaps more subtly than my suggestion above!

Does anyone remember SJG's Men in Black? Or the Kult of Keepers? Or Mongoose Infantry? ...

Um, never heard of 'em, actually. (OK, I knew of the MIB RPG - from ebay - but presumed it was D20)

... These teams of GMs went all-out to take the different games, systems and settings to conventions, games nights and so on, run lots of different scenarios, all designed to show case the rules and offer a great gaming experience.

All that effort, and for what? At cons they're still only 'preaching to the choir', advertising to existing RPG players.

My preferred option is to make use of BRP's famous simplicity. Distil the rules into a one-or-two page introductory flyer - and give it away, anywhere and everywhere possible. Mail-shot your own street, and you might get a new gaming group on your doorstep!

BRP Central clearly has a whole stack of talent who can help facilitate this approach. I'd be happy to arrange for Continuum to have a dedicated BRP Demo slot, with a gaming area set aside, for a bunch of GMs who wanted to come along and do that demoing.

Very kind. I hope you have fun with that. Good Luck!

I'm sure Chaosium would offer some GM support if approached.

Just make sure they don't send this twat:

Ugh this is why i hate going to Gaming conventions. You people (fanboys) put way too much time into speculating whether or not something can or cannot work in a game. Its a game... ... You all are ridiculous. KUDOS GUYS!! HERES A THUMBS UP :thumb:

Nick

My opinion does not reflect the opinion of Chaosium, just my own.

I'm a bit leery of the "it's CoC without the Mythos" approach. While that might attract some CoC players, it will also alienate some CoC players who won't want to see their game "stripped down". Also, a strong emphasis on CoC will discourage those who dislike CoC.

I think BRP needs to be promoted on it's own merits.

Is there any reason not to try both approaches at once?

[lawrence.whitaker]

All that effort, and for what? At cons they're still only 'preaching to the choir', advertising to existing RPG players.

My preferred option is to make use of BRP's famous simplicity. Distil the rules into a one-or-two page introductory flyer - and give it away, anywhere and everywhere possible. Mail-shot your own street, and you might get a new gaming group on your doorstep!

I'm willing to bet that the Return on Investment is higher with my approach than yours. Both require effort, but your approach is little better than unfocused mass-marketing; chances are that more flyers will end-up in the recycling bin than not. Also, what happens afterwards? How do these flyer-converts who've never played an RPG before get a game? Who runs it? How do they meet other players? How about dice?

And surely it doesn't matter that you're 'preaching to the choir'? Surely we're aiming to make BRP more popular? Or don't existing roleplayers count for that much?

And yes, sure BRP is simple... but if you've never played a roleplaying game before, no matter how clear-cut you make that one/two page flyer, it won't come across that way.

My approach might be about preaching to the choir, but it has several advantages:

1. They probably know what a roleplaying game is: you don't need to expend energy teaching them first, or hope that they get the concept from a flyer.

2. They have some other system to compare it to: 'So, in Aftermath, you'd roll damage using the 4-page flowchart. In BRP, you just roll 2D6...' 'Sure your character can use magic. You don't need to be a Magic User. Sure you can multi-class - skills let you be what you want to be.

3. You can teach the rules properly, in situ, answer questions, demonstrate the options and the nuances. You can't do that with a flyer.

4. If at a con, and it has a trade stand, there's somewhere for them to buy the rules. If you're canny, find out who'll be trading beforehand, get in touch and tell 'em you'll be demoing BRP - perhaps they'd be sure to have a copy or three of the rules available; you'd be happy to puish custom their way.

5. You reach a small group but in a targeted way. Say there are two GMs at a 1 day con, running two sessions each designed for 4 - 6 players. That's potentially 24 people - roleplayers - who will, at the end of the 3-4 hour session (possibly sooner) be converts. They may well go home, armed with their copy of the Quickstart rules that you've brought along, and tell the other 4 people in their group: you've suddenly reached 96 people who could well be interested in buying the rules without having to wander around the streets dishing-out flyers.

6. At a demo game, you're part of a group; that helps you learn. Sitting at home, on your own, with your flyer, who do you turn to?

But I wish you success with your blanket-flyers drop. I think that most studies of direct mail marketing have shown that you typically get a less than 1% take-up (it depends on the nature of the campaign, of course, but the yields are typically low). Careful targeting the market, however, typically enjoys a higher rate of success. You may also find the following link useful: http://www.hp.com/hho/smb_hp_create/media/downloads/pdf/How_NOT_to_Do_Direct_Marketing_Campaigns.pdf

[frogspawner]

You may also find the following link useful: http://www.hp.com/hho/smb_hp_create/media/downloads/pdf/How_NOT_to_Do_Direct_Marketing_Campaigns.pdf

Not particularly useful. It says "Direct marketing campaigns can be very effective... start by keeping it simple" - which I was thinking anyway - and the 3 'traps' they mention are not relevant. What would be useful is a link to...

3. A trimmed-down version of BRP that can be contained on one side of a character sheet and is easy and fast to implement.

...your approach is little better than unfocused mass-marketing; chances are that more flyers will end-up in the recycling bin than not. ... I think that most studies of direct mail marketing have shown that you typically get a less than 1% take-up

Well, I wouldn't say it's any better than 'unfocused mass-marketing' - because that's what it is ! And even 1% would be great.

But I'd hope for better from a stack of BRP Flyers dumped around the bars etc at Game Conventions, of course...

[RosenMcStern]

Very few to add to what Loz said. But there _is_ one detail.

At least one setting should be available at the conventions to play, and to purchase. Better if at least two. So we go back to the original question: what setting?

[lawrence.whitaker]

Very few to add to what Loz said. But there _is_ one detail.

At least one setting should be available at the conventions to play, and to purchase. Better if at least two. So we go back to the original question: what setting?

I think CF is as good a place to start as anywhere. It is in full print and it shows how to do D&D-style dungeon-bashing with a more effective rule-set. I'd think most roleplayers can relate to that and for demo purposes, it should do the trick.

But yes - as Paolo says, two settings is better.

[deleriad]

Some things I think.

BRP is not "simple." BRP looks simple to us as experienced roleplayers who have played BRP. A lot.

If you're wanting to hook non-roleplayers on a simple, introductory system the BRP would not be the choice.

When the ancestor to BRP came out it was not simple. It was more complex than the main competition (D&D). It was, if you like, the opposite approach to Tunnels & Trolls. Both tried to come up with a unified resolution system but RQ added a lot of complexity while T&T went for light-hearted fun.

I've been mulling over the relative popularity of Classic Fantasy and it suddenly occurred to me that BRP is the generic system that looks most like D&D pre-4e. There are the same stats, a skill system, weapons with individualised damage and so on. GURPS and Hero system are conceptually much further from D&D 4e than BRP is while newer generic systems are radically different. In fact there's an argument that D&D4e is in some ways further from previous editions than BRP is. Classic Fantasy is possibly successful because it recreates the motivation behind the original RQ: how to have D&D-like fun without being D&D.

In some ways this is a thought process that's not very productive but if it were up to me I would stop trying to make BRP something it isn't. It *is* the role-playing game your father played. Think of it like Star Trek. RQ1 was original Star Trek. BRP with a new lick of paint, talented people and fun supplements can be the new movie. I think what Classic Fantasy shows is that if you have fun while putting the work in BRP can find a market. For me then what BRP needs is focus, supplements and a virtuous circle of people playing it with friends and at cons who then do the same.

That's my 2%.

[soltakss]

Sorry for starting the CoC-Bashing.

I'll go away now.

[Mister Apocalypse]

I think CF is as good a place to start as anywhere. It is in full print and it shows how to do D&D-style dungeon-bashing with a more effective rule-set. I'd think most roleplayers can relate to that and for demo purposes, it should do the trick.

But yes - as Paolo says, two settings is better.

I think CF has something else going for it. It is the only fantasy supplement for BRP that exists at present. So for better or worse it is the only option. Personally, I think a D&Dish style is the wrong approach for BRP since D&D does that already, and it will probably give people the wrong impression of what the rest of BRP is like. But, it's still the only option we've got.

I think 3 options are even better. Say CF, Rome (it exists; it is good; it can catch the historical crowd) and a third option that would be a modern or SF setting. It's nice to have something for the folks who don't want to go the sword and spell (or sandal) route.

But what else is out there now, or will be in the near future?