Comparative Systemology

[soltakss]

Soltakss- Would you care to elaborate on the parts of your post that I bolded? I would be interested in hearing more about what people found dissatisfactory in the current incarnation. You may want to open a new thread or just email me off list if you are more comfortable doing that.

OK, no problem.

but even after playtesting and checking it still needs extensive alterations.

Starting with the easiest, http://basicroleplaying.com/forum/basic-roleplaying/322-typos-errata-corrections-clarifications.html is a four page thread on problems found with BRP Zero, in addition to the pre-Zero version that has doubled its weight due to red marker and post-its. Clearly, it still needs some work. That's not surprising since Playtesting doesn't catch everything, changes are always made afterwards and many games have extensive errata after publication. Hopefully, it will be more coherent than RQM and will need less houseruling to run as it stands.

It has a lot of rules I don't like and a lot of things I won't use, just like RQM.

Pretty much the whole of the Powers System - I just didn't like them.

The assumption that although EDU and SAN are optional rules they are regarded as pretty much core (OK, that's my anti-Coc bias showing through).

Major/Minor Wounds.

20 pages of Sanity Rules (OK, that's my anti-Coc bias showing through again).

The playtest was interesting but the game seemed to be moving further away from RQ

DEX Ranks are primary, Strike Ranks are Oprional.

Major/Minor Wounds.

Hit Locations as an optional and relatively minor rule.

The sample Character Sheet having EDU and SAN but no Hit Locations (as they are optional - just like EDU and SAN - or have I mentined this one before?)

The entire Magic System. It may be great but what happened to Spirit/Divine/Sorcery as a viable alternative?

So, those are just some reasons why I felt that BRP has moved quite a way from its RQ heart, just like RQM.

To me, it's just a variation of RQ and will always be just a variation of RQ.

[Ken]

Well I have this funny tingle down my right leg when I've been cycling for too long, and my wrist makes a funny clicking sound when I twist my forearm repeatedly.

I wondered if you practitioners of Comparative Systemology could recommend a cream for it!!!

Serious note though.

I've played RQ over the years with lots of different options, (with or without strike ranks, no hit locations, etc), and to me what always kept the core feel of Gloranthan roleplaying was the transparency of the system. Basically the, 3d6 characteristics, percentile rolls and resistance table provided all that was needed to play and this allowed the exploration of a rich world rather than comprehensive rules system.

I would be the first to say that a mechanic changes/alters/affects the way players play in a world. My style of playing has always led me to the narrative way of looking at things, so a transparent system was always perfect for that type of play.

Just my thoughts.

Ken.

[Kloster]

Congratulations soltakss, you were faster on creating this topic.

On most of the points you cited, I'm in full agreement.

I have other points:

- As hit locations, skill categories modifiers, single skill per weapon (attack/parry), strike ranks are optional, they will probably means they will not be used in the supplements, and if I want to use them, that's more work for me.

- As variable armor is standard, it will probably means it will be used in the supplements, and if I don't want to use it, that's more work for me.

- Why having used the magic from WoW and SB, and discarded the 3 from RQ.

This is why, although I like what Jason did, I think the new BRP is moving further away from RQ than the previous incarnations.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Atgxtg]

soltakss has some good points here. I also think that BRP has moved away from RQ. Not really surprise though, since that is what was being advertised. Any confusion over this can probably be the blame of Chaosium because of the BRP Monograph.

As a RQ fan, the more I've found out about BRP the less I think I'm going to like it. I like RQ, with all it's complexity, and never cared for the watered down versions such as CoC and Elric! that seem to be popular with several people here.

I don't consider BRP to be RQ anymore than I consider CoC to be RQ. RQ derived, yeah, but not RQ. MRQ, however, claims to be RQ, instead of a derivative. Claims were made as to the involvement of Greg Stafford and Steve Perrin in the development that were false. BRP makes no such claims.

Jason and Chaosium have been quite upfront about the new BRP not being RQ. Mongoose were not. The basically used the RQ name and word of Stafford's and Perrin's involvement to con a bunch of RQ fans into buying the game. I have little doubt that most of the first printings were preordered by RQ fans. I suspect that there is enough evidence to win a fraud case against Mongoose. Not there is enough money involved to make it practical (a class action suit for a few thousand people at $25 a head isn't worth the trouble).

So neither is RQ, but at least the folks behind BRP are honest about it.

[Jason D]

Jason and Chaosium have been quite upfront about the new BRP not being RQ.

Thanks for recognizing this.

Though the RQ mechanics are at the heart of BRP, the book I've produced is a direct descendant of Worlds of Wonder, with elements from Stormbringer/Elric!, Call of Cthulhu, RuneQuest*, ElfQuest, Ringworld, and Superworld.

If I were going to play RuneQuest, I'd take out my copy of RQ3 and run that.

* This is an utterly tangental point, but does anyone know why the hell runequest.com goes to Hasbro's site? Is that lingering side effect from the old Avalon Hill buyout?

[Atgxtg]

Thanks for recognizing this.

No problem. My biggest gripe with Mongoose was that they were not upfront about MRQ. I've got a few others, but that is one of the more unforgivable ones.

You've been pretty clear that this isn't a updated RQ3/BRP Monograph (I wish they had used another name for that-Deluxe Role Playing would have been better). You've mentioned that several times, as have everyone else who was familar with it/playtesting it. While I won't know if I like BRP or not unitl I see it, I don't feel like I've been conned.

I did feel that way with Mongoose.

If I were going to play RuneQuest, I'd take out my copy of RQ3 and run that.

Me too. Perhaps I might go with RQ2 for somethings (O prefer RQ2's 12 SR over RQ3s 10 SR), but overall I'm of the opinion that nothing is going to be more RQ than RQ.

* This is an utterly tangental point, but does anyone know why the hell runequest.com goes to Hasbro's site? Is that lingering side effect from the old Avalon Hill buyout?

I think so. Hasbro probably bought the domain when they still owned the name, and so now own the domain. Nothing to do except either wait for it to expire or buy the name off of them.

[Trifletraxor]

I think so. Hasbro probably bought the domain when they still owned the name, and so now own the domain. Nothing to do except either wait for it to expire or buy the name off of them.

They own the name, and they do not want to sell it. I checked a couple of years ago. :ohwell:

SGL.

[Atgxtg]

They own the name, and they do not want to sell it. I checked a couple of years ago. :ohwell:

SGL.

I think their ownership of the name, RuneQuest, expired. That is how Greg managed to buy it up. The domain on the other hand, Hasbro owns. They might be willing to sell it now. I think letting the name lapse was an oversight.

[Rurik]

If I were going to play RuneQuest, I'd take out my copy of RQ3 and run that.

The sad thing however for many old RQ fans is that:

1) No new supplements for BRP will work with RQ3 without a fair amount of work for the GM (assuming SR and Hit Locations will probably not be used for stats in most supplements as they are optional)

2) No new Glorantha supplements will work with RQ3 without even more work for the GM.

Three years ago if you told me all the tidbits about the release of BRP, The release of MRQ, and all the Release of Second Age Glorantha for RQ, I would envisioned a utopia of RQ goodness. The reality of this brave new (RQ) world has not lived up to the promise. We have RQ, BRP, and Glorantha, but somehow we have three pieces that don't all fit together or work together nicely.

Not that any of this is your fault, or Chaosiums. But I share in the pain of RQ grognards like Triff and company.

[Joseph Paul]

Thank you Soltakss and everyone else for sharing your thoughts. I appreciate it.

Anybody else want to voice what they know they don't like/find disagreeable/are mildly annoyed with about BRP?

Jason- Why start with WoW and SB? What did they offer that others did not?

[Trifletraxor]

I think their ownership of the name, RuneQuest, expired. That is how Greg managed to buy it up. The domain on the other hand, Hasbro owns. They might be willing to sell it now. I think letting the name lapse was an oversight.

Sorry, yeah that was what I meant. I contacted them about the domain when my new RQ enthusiasm was lit by the Mongoose promise of more RQ goodies. It was a flat no then at least. Got runequest.info instead, and started up a website there, but now only a Glorantha link list remain which have now been taken over by Chris Holden.

The sad thing however for many old RQ fans is that:

Not that any of this is your fault, or Chaosiums. But I share in the pain of RQ grognards like Triff and company.

Yup. Glorantha is gone for me now, which is sad because I had a lot of fun in it. Greg's "new" Glorantha never caught my interest though. I would have loved to see Gwenthia for BRP, as it seems to have similar potential. A lot of BRP success will be dependent on it getting some really good settings, with support by good material published for it.

I don't like the shift from hit locations to the major wound table from Stormbringer at all, but won't like to do a lot of conversion work either. I'll probably go with rolling for hit location (so you can have different armor), and say damage above 50% of total results as below 0 HP in that location for RQ, 100% of total leads to sever/maim, and death at -POW HP or any round below 0 total HP that you don't succeed with a POW x5 roll (or if severing/maiming a vital location).

Yup and I have somewhat dislike for the new magic system from what I've heard from it so far.

I would have preferred to play the real RQ in Glorantha with new material, but BRP with a lot of supplement in the line is the second best thing, so I'm happy with that! :thumb:

SGL.

[Joseph Paul]

Rurik I agree with you. Some how what I am seeing so far isn't giving me the game I want. I wanted BRP for a future space setting but the design choices so far seem to have been made to intentionally limit the "crunch" available. I am not even seeing options that allow more crunch to be enabled.

As a resource for running other Chaosium games it has to be suspect in that the rules that were cribbed from those other games may very well have been altered to fit other parts of BRP.

Jason, I don't mean to be such a downer or to be overly critical of a work that I haven't seen yet. However what I am reading on this forum indicates that what I want from games is not what Chaosium wants to supply at this time.

[Atgxtg]

I don't like the shift from hit locations to the major wound table from Stormbringer at all, but won't like to do a lot of conversion work either. I'll probably go with rolling for hit location (so you can have different armor), and say damage above 50% of total results as below 0 HP in that location for RQ, 100% of total leads to sever/maim, and death at -POW HP or any round below 0 total HP that you don't succeed with a POW x5 roll (or if severing/maiming a vital location).

SGL.

One thing I was thinking of was to use hit locations, but get rid of HP/location. Instead kicking the damage dice up a step for head hits and down a step for limb hits (or maybe up/down two steps). Then treat a major wound as a disabled location.

One thing about RQ that is a bit strange is that a chest hit that does enough damage to drop someone in RQ inflicts enough damage to sever a limb, or very close to it.

[Trifletraxor]

One thing I was thinking of was to use hit locations, but get rid of HP/location. Instead kicking the damage dice up a step for head hits and down a step for limb hits (or maybe up/down two steps). Then treat a major wound as a disabled location.

We're thinking likeminded here. I don't think there's a need to up the damge for the vital locations though, as hits there allready lead to more drastic consequences.

SGL.

[Atgxtg]

We're thinking likeminded here. I don't think there's a need to up the damge for the vital locations though, as hits there allready lead to more drastic consequences.

SGL.

More along the lines of a head hit being intrinsically more dangerous, life threatening that a limb hit. A couple other games do something similar.

I could see something along the lines of just adding or subtract 2 from the damage, but limit it so the you can never do more that double or half the ttotal (so a 1 point hit is always at least 1 point, and a 1 point head hit would be 2 points instead of 3).

A two point die shift (d4to d8, d8 to d12/2d6) would do the same, and allow for grazes and such.

[Jason D]

Jason- Why start with WoW and SB? What did they offer that others did not?

They provided a solid platform to build a generic multi-genre system onto that was eminently playable, with a minimum of rules complexity.

RQ assumes a fantasy background, with those emphases, some of which aren't easily applicable to other genres and settings.

[PK Games]

They provided a solid platform to build a generic multi-genre system onto that was eminently playable, with a minimum of rules complexity.

RQ assumes a fantasy background, with those emphases, some of which aren't easily applicable to other genres and settings.

Having never played Runequest or even seen a book for it, I say thank you for that Jason. Not anything against RQ or what not, but my BRP experience comes from a few Superworld games and alot of CoC.

So I would like to once again mention that you are all correct. Its not RQ. Its BRP. :deadhorse:

[Atgxtg]

Berlin '61: The only RPG proven to make your mother love you more! (26/420)

I got to know. Where did that come from? :shocked:

[The Venomous Pao]

I'm in the "thanks for making BRP, not another iteration of RuneQuest" camp, personally.

I love (love, people, l-o-v-e) what I've read in Zero Edition so far. Yes, there have been some typos and things that needed clarification, but those things are to be expected in what amounts to a proofreader's copy. Anyone who is scared off of the final version before there is a final version just because of the typos and errors found in such an advance text probably should stay away from sausage factories. You do not want to see how the stuff is made.

Also, judging the game based on an early sample character sheet seems right up there with judging a book by its cover to me.

All this angst over things being made optional confuses me. It's not really the same as taking the sacred cow out back, shooting it in the head and turning it into hamburger. It's just streamlining things a bit for the newbies (yes, like me) but leaving the option for the crunchier stuff for those who want it. Take strike ranks. I don't like 'em. I'll never use 'em. They're too crunchy for my tastes. Now, I could get mad that they're in the book taking up space that could've been used to flesh out the powers systems (which I do like). But hey, why stress? Let's let everyone have their options.

Now I'll admit where I can see how this might lead someone to think that these options won't be readily supported in supplemental material. But I'd suspect that, given the relatively small amount of effort required to include them, they don't get dropped. And if they do, that same small amount of effort can add them back in for each person who chooses to do so.

In my initial read through I didn't really get the idea that EDU and SAN are considered core. I also don't quite remember the sanity rules taking twenty pages. I don't have the book here with me right now, though, so I won't get pedantic and count them. I'll just say that these concerns seem to me to be the most unfounded. Not less meaningful, just unfounded.

In the end, though, I'm not here to tell people they're wrong or anything. I just thought I'd throw my hat in with the "I like it, sorry you don't" crowd.

As to soltakss's "final" sentiment in the first post

To me, it's just a variation of RQ and will always be just a

variation of RQ.

All I can say is wow. I mean, you're entirely within your rights to feel that way. But it seems like an awfully limiting world view. Still, if you feel that way then, to be all zen-like, that's the way you feel.

Anyway, I'll repeat for sanity's sake, I'm not into this for a fight. I just don't understand the vitriol or the judging something apparently sight unseen.

Like I said, I'm glad this isn't just a redo of RQ. I was never into RQ. It's a fine game in its own right, but I happen to like BRP better. So I'm glad to see it get a new lease on life. I can't help but wonder if that, in the end, isn't what all this is about. BRP gets resurrected but RQ proper doesn't (MRQ notwithstanding) and that upsets people. Then again, I might just be reading too deeply into things.

Oh, and a note to Joseph Paul: I don't see any way in which BRP couldn't be used for a future space setting. What crunch is it that you don't perceive to be in the rules (even as options)? Strike Ranks are there. Hit Locations are there. HP by location is present, too. I'm not trying to refute you here, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from and what you think is missing.

[frogspawner]

I'll probably go with rolling for hit location (so you can have different armor), and say damage above 50% of total results as below 0 HP in that location for RQ, 100% of total leads to sever/maim, and death at -POW HP or any round below 0 total HP that you don't succeed with a POW x5 roll (or if severing/maiming a vital location).

One thing I was thinking of was to use hit locations, but get rid of HP/location. Instead kicking the damage dice up a step for head hits and down a step for limb hits (or maybe up/down two steps). Then treat a major wound as a disabled location.

Sounds pretty similar to what I've been using recently (have I said this before?):

HP = SIZ*/2, roll location (if rqd), 0hp or below disables location, -5 is Serious wound**, -10 is Critical wound**, -CON is dead.

* (Or use your favourite method to calculate HPs, and divide that by 2.)

** Each location has a small sub-table of possible Serious/Critical wounds, i.e. one for each sub-location (elbow, forearm, etc).

(Edit - Serious: break or similar; Critical: sever/maim).

[Kloster]

soltakss has some good points here. I also think that BRP has moved away from RQ. Not really surprise though, since that is what was being advertised. Any confusion over this can probably be the blame of Chaosium because of the BRP Monograph.

As a RQ fan, the more I've found out about BRP the less I think I'm going to like it. I like RQ, with all it's complexity, and never cared for the watered down versions such as CoC and Elric! that seem to be popular with several people here.

I don't consider BRP to be RQ anymore than I consider CoC to be RQ. RQ derived, yeah, but not RQ. MRQ, however, claims to be RQ, instead of a derivative. Claims were made as to the involvement of Greg Stafford and Steve Perrin in the development that were false. BRP makes no such claims.

Jason and Chaosium have been quite upfront about the new BRP not being RQ. Mongoose were not. The basically used the RQ name and word of Stafford's and Perrin's involvement to con a bunch of RQ fans into buying the game. I have little doubt that most of the first printings were preordered by RQ fans. I suspect that there is enough evidence to win a fraud case against Mongoose. Not there is enough money involved to make it practical (a class action suit for a few thousand people at $25 a head isn't worth the trouble).

So neither is RQ, but at least the folks behind BRP are honest about it.

Completely agree here. And I think the work is well done, but it is not what I would like to have.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Atgxtg]

Anyone who is scared off of the final version before there is a final version just because of the typos and errors found in such an advance text probably should stay away from sausage factories. You do not want to see how the stuff is made.

Ever read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair?

I won't eat hot dogs. I hope Jason doesn't put as much himself or rat feces into BRP as is used in sausage factories.

That said. I don't consider 'zero" to be anything other than a work in progress, and won't hold it's errors against BRP when it comes out.

Also, judging the game based on an early sample character sheet seems right up there with judging a book by its cover to me.

You can tell a lot about a RPG by looking at a character sheet. Much more than by looking at the cover. But it is like judging the book after reading one page.

All this angst over things being made optional confuses me. It's not really the same as taking the sacred cow out back, shooting it in the head and turning it into hamburger. It's just streamlining things a bit for the newbies (yes, like me) but leaving the option for the crunchier stuff for those who want it. Take strike ranks. I don't like 'em. I'll never use 'em. They're too crunchy for my tastes. Now, I could get mad that they're in the book taking up space that could've been used to flesh out the powers systems (which I do like). But hey, why stress? Let's let everyone have their options.

I think the angst comes in over the supplments. As some others have pointed out, it is a lot more work to write up SR, hit location, and piecemeal armor data for all the characters in a supplment then it is to ignore the stuff you don't want to use. Enough work to cut down on any appeal that using a predesigned adventure has.

IMO I think they should either cover the options in supplments or work up some sort of genre conventions with certain sets of options that work together. For instance, putting most of the RQ options together for a "gritty fantasy" setting, or the CoC ones together for CoC stuff and so forth.

Of course that does bring up another question that is yet to be asked. Just what does BRP mean for CoC? Will they be two separate systems. Will CoC be "folded" into BRP? We we see stuff written for both COC and BRP?

Like I said, I'm glad this isn't just a redo of RQ. I was never into RQ. It's a fine game in its own right, but I happen to like BRP better. So I'm glad to see it get a new lease on life. I can't help but wonder if that, in the end, isn't what all this is about. BRP gets resurrected but RQ proper doesn't (MRQ notwithstanding) and that upsets people. Then again, I might just be reading too deeply into things.

Well BRP can't really be resurrected because it never existed. There was RQ, Stormbringer, CoC, and WoW. Each of the old games was different from the others. All of them were based off on RQ to some extent, until RQ3, when Chaosium started using CoC for a design base. BRP as a basis for other games is really a fiction. WoW was really about the only thing based on BRP.

By that reasoning it makes sense that WoW was used as a source for a new BRP RPG.

[Trifletraxor]

HP = SIZ*/2, roll location (if rqd), 0hp or below disables location, -5 is Serious wound**, -10 is Critical wound**, -CON is dead.

Would you care to elaborate? I didn't really get it the first time around.

SGL.

[PK Games]

I got to know. Where did that come from? :shocked:

I always view advertising slogans to be big bold face lies. So I figured Id create one that was just plain ridiculous for my B61

[Kloster]

...

That said. I don't consider 'zero" to be anything other than a work in progress, and won't hold it's errors against BRP when it comes out.

...

I think the angst comes in over the supplments. As some others have pointed out, it is a lot more work to write up SR, hit location, and piecemeal armor data for all the characters in a supplment then it is to ignore the stuff you don't want to use. Enough work to cut down on any appeal that using a predesigned adventure has.

...

Idem for 1st part.

For 2nd part, this is exactly what I had in mind. It is easier to ignore what you don't want than to add what you want and is missing. Apart the fact that I would have liked to get something more Runequesty, my main point is that I would have prefered the opposite way, ie the most comprehensive default, with optional simplifications.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster