Download the free Basic Roleplaying ORC Content Document – sell the games you create royalty-free!

[MOB]

Basic Roleplaying's Universal Game Engine is available royalty-free for personal and commercial use under the Open RPG Creative (ORC) license. Use these rules, and focus on creating your worlds, scenarios and even books to sell!

Download the free BRP ORC Content Document

nb this is essentially the entire text of Basic Roleplaying Universal Game Engine, which you can use royalty-free for personal and commercial purposes:

• Basic Roleplaying ORC Content Document - RTF (Rich Text Format)
• Basic Roleplaying ORC Content Document - PDF

Find out more at our new Getting Started - Designing Games page.

And check out the BRP Design Challenge: its goal is to financially assist new and upcoming creators in bringing their games to independent publication (be that digital or print). Chaosium seeks to empower designers from all walks of life, with original ideas, concepts, and systems, with the goal of seeing all shortlisted entries eventually published independently.

All entrants retain ownership of their work in its entirety.

 

 

*With the release of BRP Orc Content Document, please also use this thread to report any typos or errors spotted. Please note here, quoting the page number, the error, and the suggested correction.

Edited March 11 by MOB

[Saki]

Does this still contain the 1.02 text or is this the errata updated text?

[Peter Fitz]

Having an editable .RTF is great, but what would be even greater (and would make life a lot easier) would be an OpenDocument .ODT (or even, heaven forfend, a .DOCX) file with paragraph styles included. That would make reformatting the document so much easier, and would allow the creation of a table of contents with ease.

[Jason D]

13 hours ago, Saki said:

Does this still contain the 1.02 text or is this the errata updated text?

Updated. 

[Raleel]

Indeed. Rtf is good, and I won't complain. However, with heading styles you can convert to markdown and put on a website. I did exactly this, including manually going through and doing the headings, for brpugesrd.xyz

[Saki]

I ask because it looks like a number of the submissions on the error/corrections thread are still present in these files.

[g33k]

2 hours ago, Saki said:

I ask because it looks like a number of the submissions on the error/corrections thread are still present in these files.

n.b. that thread is periodically swept by Chaosium & addressed en masse, rather than each being addressed as it's posted here.
I'd expect most of the recent items to be not-yet-addressed.

[Saki]

I'll hold out for the errata document to be released, I guess.

[Saki]

Ok so the 1.03 book PDF is available now for download on the Chaosium website, and the files above are definitely based on the 1.02 version of the book.  Some of the corrections I specifically noticed in the 1.03 book are not included in these files.

[Jason D]

On 3/8/2024 at 3:00 PM, Saki said:

I ask because it looks like a number of the submissions on the error/corrections thread are still present in these files.

Not every suggestion was implemented because some were simply wrong. 

[Saki]

3 minutes ago, Jason D said:

Not every suggestion was implemented because some were simply wrong.

That's not what I am referring to - I mean that some changes which were implemented into the 1.03 book PDF, are not included in the RTF/pdf files linked above.  For example, the added sentence at the end of the "Overcoming POW" section on page 55 of the 1.03 PDF is not present in the RTF file.  The RTF file is identical to the 1.02 pdf.

[Jason D]

Unfortunately, edits to the .rtf had to be made by hand vs. a re-export of the material, and minor errors may have crept in, or corrections may have been overlooked. There were several hundred small corrections, and some things got missed.

At times, when correcting the .pdf I needed to make small adjustments to text solely to keep the word flow intact, which is a thing that has to be done when adjusting heavily-indexed .pdfs. 

When in doubt, refer to the new .pdf. 

I know that's not ideal, but it will have to be the state of things until we can spare the time to reformat a new exported .pdf and prep it for .rtf (The process takes about a week of detailed cleanup.)

[g33k]

2 hours ago, Jason D said:

Unfortunately, edits to the .rtf had to be made by hand vs. a re-export of the material, and minor errors may have crept in, or corrections may have been overlooked. There were several hundred small corrections, and some things got missed.

At times, when correcting the .pdf I needed to make small adjustments to text solely to keep the word flow intact, which is a thing that has to be done when adjusting heavily-indexed .pdfs. 

When in doubt, refer to the new .pdf. 

I know that's not ideal, but it will have to be the state of things until we can spare the time to reformat a new exported .pdf and prep it for .rtf (The process takes about a week of detailed cleanup.)

Thank you, Jason... this answers exactly the question I was about to pose (and confirms the rhetorical "it's probably a PITA to reconcile..." I was gonna include).

[Jason D]

And as mentioned above, sometimes suggested corrections are just wrong, such as the insistence on capitalizing dodge when it's used as a verb instead of a skill name. 

Correct: "The pirates climb the rigging to get at the heroes." 
Correct: "The pirates must make successful Climb rolls to get at the heroes." 

Correct: "The player character must parry or dodge the attack." 
Correct: "The player character must make a successful Parry or Dodge roll to avoid the attack." 

We could technically go with: 

"The pirates Climb the rigging to get at the heroes" or "The player character must Parry or Dodge the attack" but this gets awkward when you apply the same principle to many other skill names that are also verbs. 

[g33k]

6 hours ago, Jason D said:

And as mentioned above, sometimes suggested corrections are just wrong, such as the insistence on capitalizing dodge when it's used as a verb instead of a skill name. 

Correct: "The pirates climb the rigging to get at the heroes." 
Correct: "The pirates must make successful Climb rolls to get at the heroes." 

Correct: "The player character must parry or dodge the attack." 
Correct: "The player character must make a successful Parry or Dodge roll to avoid the attack." 

We could technically go with: 

"The pirates Climb the rigging to get at the heroes" or "The player character must Parry or Dodge the attack" but this gets awkward when you apply the same principle to many other skill names that are also verbs. 

One must -- quite Obviously, my friend -- write in an archaic fashion, with Randomly Capitalized letters, such that the Modern Reader is utterly Befuddled, and quite entirely Forgets to Post their so-called Corrections.

Edited March 14 by g33k

[Saki]

Thanks for the additional context and clarifications Jason.

[Kabouter Games]

Is there a high-resolution version of the "Powered by BRP" logo available? 

Thanks! 

[smiorgan]

On 4/4/2024 at 9:55 AM, Kabouter Games said:

Is there a high-resolution version of the "Powered by BRP" logo available? 

Thanks! 

Do you have plans for further BRP releases? Toxandria was good.