Comparative Systemology

[CruelDespot]

I am not a fan of RQ3. I'm a former Elric! player. I think Elric! was the pinnacle of RPG perfection. I am also a big fan of CoC. So when I read that the primary source for the new BRP is Elric, followed by CoC, it made me happy.

I understand why Runequest 3 fans would be frustrated, but you can't please everyone.

Jason "I am designing a new motorcycle"

RQ3 fans "But I want a pickup truck."

Jason "OK, but other people want a new motorcycle, so that's what I am making."

Later...

Jason : "How do you like my new motorcycle?"

RQ3 fans: "What? It doesn't have a cargo bed? How am I going to use this as a pickup truck?"

Jason: "How do you like it as a motorcycle?"

RQ3 fans: "Could you add 3 seats, a payload capacity of 2 tons, four wheel drive..."

Well I want a motorcycle. The pickup druck division is over at Mongoose publishing. If you don't like their new pickup truck product, don't blame the motorcycle division.

[Triff]

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

I agree. That would be the preferred way to handle the supplements at least.

SGL.

[Shaira]

I agree. That would be the preferred way to handle the supplements at least.

SGL.

I think it probably depends on the genre, but in generally I agree it's also probably the only way to go. I'm putting some stuff together for a fantasy setting at the mo which may one day see the light of day, and am deliberately factoring in a whole heap of optional BRP rules (Strike Ranks, Fatigue, Hit Locations, etc) into the critter stats at both scenario and sourcebook level, whether or not I personally would use them. That way you'll have some redundancy - a critter would have both Major Wound and Hit Location stats, for example, and you pick and choose based on the game you want.

I agree it would be a pain to have to try and derive hit location stats from a beastie that's only provided with Major Wound data.

Incidentally, the only place where this becomes a bit of a hiccough is the magic system. This maybe where GMs have to use some discretion - if your campaign only uses Sorcery, say, and a generic adventure you buy has Magic stats, you'll have to do some natty switching over. Alternately, settings sourcebooks will probably end up stating their conventions explicitly (ie "this sourcebook assumes both Magic and Sorcery are used", etc).

One last point regarding the "BRP-is-not-RQ" debate - Atgxtg, Kloster, have you seen the BRP Zero rules, yet? Just wondering - reading the rules, I can't actually see what the problem is! :happy: From my POV the rules as written are very flexible, and plenty complex enough if you want them to be to stand up to a RQ comparison. The only place they don't compare is the Powers chapter - that's the only bit you'd have to modify to do a RQ game with the BRP rules. IE, BRP Zero + RQ3 Magic book = an updated version of the old RQ rules. Certainly a base rules set which could handle a "Magic and Heroquesting" supplement somewhere down the line. So far, as an old RQ grognard, I absolutely love what I'm seeing with the new BRP - and hope it gets the setting, sourcebook, and scenario support which it deserves!

Cheers,

Sarah

[soltakss]

Congratulations soltakss, you were faster on creating this topic.

My wife was on a nicotine-withdrawal-rant so I made myself scarce for a couple of hours.

I didn't mention that having a lot of Optional Rules made supplements difficult to write as you can't always tell which rules to include and which to ignore.

I do agree with you that it will be difficult.

What we'll probably get is CoC supplements using some optional rules and fantasy supplements using others. So, we should get the same optional rules used for similar supplements.

[soltakss]

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)

Well, I think that you could run a scenario fairly easily with RQ3. The only real problem would be no Hit Locations DEX Ranks not Strike Ranks, Variable Armour and possibly the Magic System. Hopefully Chaosium will release the RQ3 Magic System as a BRP supplement, or perhaps a variant of the RQ3 Magic System.

But, if you are used to running things on the fly, as I am, it's not really a problem. It's only a big problem if you convert every NPC to RQ3 before playing and I don#t bother doing that.

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

Well, Third Age Glorantha is HeroQuest, Second Age Glorantha is RQM and both wil need some work. BRP probably won't have Gloranthan supplements so it has no effect.

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.

Well, yes. But I have high hopes of Third Party Publishers producing supplements that are semi-compatible with BRP/RQM/RQ3 and can be used in many different settings.

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

We can't really blame Chaosium for producing BRP that is different to RQM or Mongoose for producing RQM that is different to RQ3 or indeed anyone.

GORE has shown that something using the RQM SRD can be made to be similar to older versions of RQ and that's the way forward in my opinion.

[soltakss]

One last point regarding the "BRP-is-not-RQ" debate - Atgxtg, Kloster, have you seen the BRP Zero rules, yet?

The original question asked about my personal opinion on the playtest version. I haven't seen BRP Zero as stated before.

I'm not saying that BRP should be just like RQ.

What I'm saying is that I am a big, big fan of RQ and I would have liked BRP to be a continuation of its RQ heritage. It has a RQ heritage, despite what people want to think. I've never liked Call of Cthulhu, played some Elric, liked Hawkmoon and Ringworld but I've never been a fan of the other BRP systems. I saw them as cut-down versions of RQ.

So, I was half-expecting BRP to be an extension of the RQ3-style Monograph, as Chaosium's Roleplaying System. It isn't and I am disappointed with that.

I'm not saying that BRP is a bad system, it definitely isn't that. It's just different to what I had hoped.

I had a pickup truck and they promised me something better. What I got was a motorcycle with optional bulldozer attachment, sidecar and cargo trailer. I still want a pickup truck with a new paint job and better lights, handling, suspension, satnav, TV and en-suite shower and toilet.

Is that too much to ask?

[Rurik]

I'm not faulting BRP for being what it is, just for not being what I want.

Seriously, it is not Jason or Chaosiums fault that Greg Secured the RQ trademark faster than they did when it expired (well ok, maybe that is Chaosium's fault), and then licensed it to MGP.

Seriously (no seriously this time). BRP looks like it will be exactly what it set out to be, and that is exactly what a lot of people are looking for (a generic Elric! implementation, Superpowers, Sci-Fi). I'm getting it for sure, and will use it (to what extent I don't know yet).

But it is not what the RQ Grognards really want, and it is not a slight to Jason or Chaosium to say so, it is a fact. And it was our last hope (Help us Obi-Wan Durall, you are our last hope), when MRQ, SA Glorantha, and DBRP were all in the works how could we help but envision a gaming utopia on the horizon? It has not materialised the way we envisioned - what we have is a bunch of seperate pieces that we have to work hard to fit together. Nope, Pendragon and the GPC it has not been.

[Kloster]

I am not a fan of RQ3. I'm a former Elric! player. I think Elric! was the pinnacle of RPG perfection. I am also a big fan of CoC. So when I read that the primary source for the new BRP is Elric, followed by CoC, it made me happy.

I understand why Runequest 3 fans would be frustrated, but you can't please everyone.

Jason "I am designing a new motorcycle"

RQ3 fans "But I want a pickup truck."

Jason "OK, but other people want a new motorcycle, so that's what I am making."

Later...

Jason : "How do you like my new motorcycle?"

RQ3 fans: "What? It doesn't have a cargo bed? How am I going to use this as a pickup truck?"

Jason: "How do you like it as a motorcycle?"

RQ3 fans: "Could you add 3 seats, a payload capacity of 2 tons, four wheel drive..."

Well I want a motorcycle. The pickup druck division is over at Mongoose publishing. If you don't like their new pickup truck product, don't blame the motorcycle division.

I'm not blaming the motorcycle division. I've even said I find Jason did a nice job. I knew BRP was not envisionned to become RQ from the beginning. What I say is:

1 - I would have prefered RQ (which is, for me, the pinnacle of BRP), but this is a personnal taste, and I'm not complaining on that, because I'm not frustrated. I just have what has been promised.

2 - The fact that Jason choose SB5 and CoC as main sources bring a simpler, less detailed game as default, with lots of optional rules to add complexity. As I have already explained, this will bring more work to use the supplements if they focus (which they should) on the core rules. I find simpler to remove what I don't use than add everything I want and is not present.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

I think it probably depends on the genre, but in generally I agree it's also probably the only way to go. I'm putting some stuff together for a fantasy setting at the mo which may one day see the light of day, and am deliberately factoring in a whole heap of optional BRP rules (Strike Ranks, Fatigue, Hit Locations, etc) into the critter stats at both scenario and sourcebook level, whether or not I personally would use them. That way you'll have some redundancy - a critter would have both Major Wound and Hit Location stats, for example, and you pick and choose based on the game you want.

...

This is what I would like to have, but I'm afraid to miss. If the supplements are presented that way, most of the griefs I do have are gone.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Shaira]

Gosh, guys, I must say I'm quite surprised at the negativity shown on this thread, especially - and with all due respect - in many cases from people who haven't actually seen the rules yet! In fact, I'm picking up such negative vibes I'm even reluctant to post, cos a lot of this just feels like a moan that BRP isn't the new edition of RQ. I'm reading things like:

[FROM RURIK]

"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)"

Well, first, as you say, you're "assuming" that SR and Hit Locations will *probably* not be used. In other words, you don't actually know, but you've got yourself upset and disappointed cos you think maybe they won't. Why not wait for some actual real world supplements and see, first, rather than making your mind up before the facts?

And, second, why on earth should BRP work with RQ3 without some work for the GM? They're different games. Of course you can play in Glorantha using the BRP rules. And, if you want to play RQ3, you of course can do that, too. And, yes, BRP is not RQ3, so you can't play RQ3 with it. This method of argument does seem a bit circular.

I do actually wonder what you were expecting, guys - presumably a new Gloranthan RPG based on RQ? If so, I don't really think that was ever on the cards - or if it was, that's MRQ, and there you take your chances and make your choices.

I'm just about finished on my first read-through of the BRP Zero rules, and I'm extremely happy - nay, delighted - with what I see - and I'm a RQ grognard, Rurik, so there! What else were you looking for? >:->

Of course what happens next is largely up to Chaosium and their approach to sourcebooks & licensing, but that's a business call.

I must admit to being puzzled as to how this could have ever been anything different. I can appreciate that a lot of people who dearly wanted a new edition of RQ were very disappointed with MRQ (as indeed was I - desperately so), but Chaosium never advertised they were publishing a new RQ, whilst Mongoose did, so the negative spin about BRP here does seem very, very unfair - especially since the BRP Zero is a damn fine job!

The Chaosium House system is back in print, guys, and by all accounts new support material in numerous settings will be next - what's not to like?

Cheers,

Sarah

ps - Kloster, you mentioned earlier in this thread that you thought variable armour was standard - it's not. Which is nice.

[Kloster]

...

I agree it would be a pain to have to try and derive hit location stats from a beastie that's only provided with Major Wound data.

...

This is a perfect exemple.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Shaira]

This is what I would like to have, but I'm afraid to miss. If the supplements are presented that way, most of the griefs I do have are gone.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

Cool! I think pushing for this approach would be best. To be honest, it would seem to me to be the most sensible way to run things, too - less work for the GM up-front. And as Simon says, we'll probably get some genre-specific consensus developing over time as to which optional rules get used. Hopefully things like Bestiaries, and so on, will do something like that. (Anyone out there fancy writing up a Bestiary? :happy:)

Cheers,

Sarah

[Kloster]

...

One last point regarding the "BRP-is-not-RQ" debate - Atgxtg, Kloster, have you seen the BRP Zero rules, yet?

...

I've stated I will not buy edition 0 for economical reasons (too high sending cost). I'm saving my money for the day the final version will be released. But all the points I have cited have been explicitly cited by Jason.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

...

The only place they don't compare is the Powers chapter - that's the only bit you'd have to modify to do a RQ game with the BRP rules. IE, BRP Zero + RQ3 Magic book = an updated version of the old RQ rules. Certainly a base rules set which could handle a "Magic and Heroquesting" supplement somewhere down the line.

...

This is what I plan to do once final version is released.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Shaira]

This is what I plan to do once final version is released.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

You can chalk me up for a copy of that! :thumb:

[Kloster]

...

I had a pickup truck and they promised me something better. What I got was a motorcycle with optional bulldozer attachment, sidecar and cargo trailer. I still want a pickup truck with a new paint job and better lights, handling, suspension, satnav, TV and en-suite shower and toilet.

...

That's true, you've played Car Wars!!!

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

I'm not faulting BRP for being what it is, just for not being what I want.

Seriously, it is not Jason or Chaosiums fault that Greg Secured the RQ trademark faster than they did when it expired (well ok, maybe that is Chaosium's fault), and then licensed it to MGP.

Seriously (no seriously this time). BRP looks like it will be exactly what it set out to be, and that is exactly what a lot of people are looking for (a generic Elric! implementation, Superpowers, Sci-Fi). I'm getting it for sure, and will use it (to what extent I don't know yet).

But it is not what the RQ Grognards really want, and it is not a slight to Jason or Chaosium to say so, it is a fact. And it was our last hope (Help us Obi-Wan Durall, you are our last hope), when MRQ, SA Glorantha, and DBRP were all in the works how could we help but envision a gaming utopia on the horizon? It has not materialised the way we envisioned - what we have is a bunch of seperate pieces that we have to work hard to fit together. Nope, Pendragon and the GPC it has not been.

Agreed here.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

...

ps - Kloster, you mentioned earlier in this thread that you thought variable armour was standard - it's not. Which is nice.

My mistake. I stand corrected. :innocent:

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Rurik]

I've always pointed out that I don't blame Jason or Chaosium for what BRP is. They have delivered exactly what they wanted and promised, in what hopefully will be coherant project. I think people are taking us RQ grognards bitching about nobody really delivering what we want as criticism of what BRP is. The two are not the same thing.

We have to bitch places like here and the MRQ forums because, well, we have no home. ;-(

I will be shocked, but very happy, if most supplements that come out include Hit Locations and SR's, and will happily eat crow.

I've thought about how to stat up creatures to be universal based on bits' from this board - I know RQ and Elric! and CoC etc. etc. well enough to plan this out, and it is not easy to come up with one generic stat block - nor do I think it is a good idea, as one block with multiple mutually exclusive optional rules in it would be very confusing to a new comer - so multiple stat sets for npc's and monsters is the only way I can see to do this cleanly. Even multiple stat sets is not perfect though, as it sounds as if there are a lot of modular optional rules, and covering all the possible iterations will be difficult.

That is why I suspect most supplements will include stat's for the base core rules only. I hope I'm wrong.

[Rurik]

Hey, wait a minute, why I am I on the defensive about comparing RQ to BRP in a thread titled 'Comparative Systemology' that was created specifically for this purpose? :eek:

BRP suXX- RQ RAWKz!

(did I get my l33t speak right?)

[Jason D]

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.

Two things I should clarify:

a) I am not a line editor at Chaosium, and at no point have I stated "this is the way it's gonna be" as regards to supplements. I spoke only about what I felt would work better, and what I plan on doing for my own Interplanetary book. If Charlie comes back and says "Hey, we really need to add all of the options into your manuscript" I will do so.

It's probably about the same amount of work to add optional stuff as to subtract it, and trying to go both direction makes for an extremely overcomplex NPC writeup. Some options aren't exactly compatible with one another, as well.

Imagine, if you will, an NPC stat block containing all of the optional stuff, perhaps in parentheses to distinguish the stuff. I'll walk you through a combo of the options...

• Hit Points Per Location in addition to general HP... not much conflict there
  
• Fatigue Points and Sanity... easy enough to add... this seems easy!
  
• Armor per Hit Location is easy enough to add, but what if the GM wants random armor?
  
• Heroic Hit Points doubles HP, and causes a double value if you want to have normal HP also represented
  
• Splitting Attack and Parry Skills... hmm... now each melee weapon skill has two values - what if I only want to use one? Do I average them, or just use attack?
  
• Skill Category Modifiers - should they be presented and not added, or should they be included and GMs not wishing to use them must subtract the values from existing skills?
  
• Simpler Skill Bonuses - hmm... these don't really mesh with the above easily, do they?
  
• Increased Personal Skill Points, Cultural Modifiers, EDU/Knowledge rolls, etc. - do I add these for GMs who want to use them, and make GMs who don't want to use them remove them, or do I put them in a block alongside each NPC writeup?
  
• Skill Ratings Over 100% - hoo-boy! Do I want to play Elric! style, with NPCs with attack skills of 300% or more, do I want to keep things simple and say that 100% is the top? Does each skill have two ratings, based on where you want to put the limit? Over 100% and under 100%?
  

And I could go on...

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?

I have no idea what BRP means for CoC. I'm assuming that Charlie and Lynn have an idea, but I'm sure they're smart enough to see how BRP does before making any decisions.

[The Tweaker]

Gosh, guys, I must say I'm quite surprised at the negativity shown on this thread, especially - and with all due respect - in many cases from people who haven't actually seen the rules yet! In fact, I'm picking up such negative vibes I'm even reluctant to post, cos a lot of this just feels like a moan that BRP isn't the new edition of RQ.

I am sorry to say that this is how I feel sometimes when reading the posts in this and other threads. Not to offend anyone, but sometimes it looks like the worst enemies of the new BRP are precisely the older fans of the system. I for one am glad Sarah is here to balance things up! Thanks!

I'm just about finished on my first read-through of the BRP Zero rules, and I'm extremely happy - nay, delighted - with what I see - and I'm a RQ grognard, Rurik, so there! What else were you looking for? >:->

(...)

The Chaosium House system is back in print, guys, and by all accounts new support material in numerous settings will be next - what's not to like?

That's exactly my view of things. I have very little experience with BRP (mostly CoC, which was the first rpg I played/GM'd, a loooong time ago). I never had any interest in Glorantha at all because my interests lay in the sci-fi/horror field, and neither RQ nor Elric!/Stormbringer caught my attention but, recognizing it was an excellent system, I would have loved to have a complete, settingless version of the rules - just like the one which is going to be released any day now. There was none at the time, so I turned to GURPS.

Thus, you could say I am relatively new to the system and I am very excited about the new BRP, not only because it looks like it will be just the book I would have loved to own all those years ago, but also because I am pretty sure by now that it will be an excellent work, perfectly able to stand on its own and attract new fans to the system. And Sarah's opinion is just further proof of that.

I understand it might not be what older fans were waiting for... and I am sorry for you, but for a newcomer like me, it is exactly what I am looking for.

[Trifletraxor]

Imagine, if you will, an NPC stat block containing all of the optional stuff, perhaps in parentheses to distinguish the stuff. I'll walk you through a combo of the options...

• Hit Points Per Location in addition to general HP... not much conflict there
  
• Armor per Hit Location is easy enough to add, but what if the GM wants random armor?

AP & HP per location, pluss SR, is the most important part here. If they're added, it would go a long way of helping anyone who want to run combat RQ3 style. Random armor is rarely wanted with hit locations, but if someone does, the fixed AP number will have a variable equivalent that can easily be remembered by the GM, so no need to add that.

• Fatigue Points and Sanity... easy enough to add... this seems easy!
  
• Heroic Hit Points doubles HP, and causes a double value if you want to have normal HP also represented
  
• Splitting Attack and Parry Skills... hmm... now each melee weapon skill has two values - what if I only want to use one? Do I average them, or just use attack?
  
• Skill Category Modifiers - should they be presented and not added, or should they be included and GMs not wishing to use them must subtract the values from existing skills?
  
• Simpler Skill Bonuses - hmm... these don't really mesh with the above easily, do they?
  
• Increased Personal Skill Points, Cultural Modifiers, EDU/Knowledge rolls, etc. - do I add these for GMs who want to use them, and make GMs who don't want to use them remove them, or do I put them in a block alongside each NPC writeup?

All the stuff you've mentioned here is not at all neccessay for NPCs. This variable rules are added in the players character generation, no need to pay attention to cultural modifiers for NPCs f.ex.

• Skill Ratings Over 100% - hoo-boy! Do I want to play Elric! style, with NPCs with attack skills of 300% or more, do I want to keep things simple and say that 100% is the top? Does each skill have two ratings, based on where you want to put the limit? Over 100% and under 100%?

That should be setting dependent.

And I could go on...

Yup, but the only really important ones are location HP & AP, and SR. Well, actually HP and SR is the only important ones, you could assume the same armor on all locations (which have been common for NPCs by the way).

For me personally it will not matter, as I will just tweak the major wound rules to my liking, and add the hit location dice to determine where you hit. But for those who want to use hit locations and SR, adding those two for NPCs would be a huge help.

SGL.

[frogspawner]

Gosh, guys, I must say I'm quite surprised at the negativity shown on this thread...

Well, you shouldn't be. Didn't you know? As Rurik implied, this thread was specifically set up to discuss Soltakss's dissatisfaction with BRP (to avoid clogging up the 'glorantha' thread), in answer to direct questions about it (in the full knowledge he hasn't seen Zero).

I've thought about how to stat up creatures to be universal based on bits' from this board...

That is why I suspect most supplements will include stat's for the base core rules only. I hope I'm wrong.

Don't worry, let 'em stat-up for base core only - it's won't be a problem...

Imagine, if you will, an NPC stat block containing all of the optional stuff, perhaps in parentheses to distinguish the stuff. I'll walk you through a combo of the options...

[<long long list that fully justifies the core-only option> snipped]

And I could go on...

Yes, having all those options makes it (almost?) unfeasible to print all the possibilities...

I understand it might not be what older fans were waiting for... and I am sorry for you, but for a newcomer like me, it is exactly what I am looking for.

So the books really should use only the simplest, core options - to be newbie-friendly.

Therefore, we old-timers and others who don't want the defaults, could do with a kind of interactive "Foes". A java prog or similar could do the job, I'm sure. Chaosium could stick in on their site. A few radio buttons for options, pop-down the number/type of creatures, some other parameters, press the button - and bingo! Monsters with whatever options you want, ready-to-print...

[Jason D]

Had a post here, but it just belabored a point. So deleted.