Why is BRP not that popular?

[Nightshade]

What's a point build approach?

Basically, one where you control every aspect of initial character design (and usually advancement) from a pool of available resource. BRP comes from the days of random character gen and that's really what it wants to support; it has attribute distribution as an option, but its not really well supported because it treats all attributes equal there, something I doubt many BRP players would consider rational.

Also, the disadvantage system seems like something that can be taken from any other game system and added to BRP--or just created on the fly ("the PC

I think your idea of how easy this is to do halfway right is way over generous; weighting how much benefit a given disadvantage should be requires a pretty good idea of the system as a whole to do so; its not something most people are going to do well with limited exposure, and I suspect they know it.

In other words, saying it can be done doesn't say much about how attractive the system is; its like saying "Well, if they're willing to do fairly major design work..." The point is, few people _want_ to do fairly major design work.

[Nightshade]

Does D&D have an Advantage/Disadvantage system? In any of its incarnations?

I don't recall seeing one. And yet, it is the most popular "modern" system around.

-V

And there are people who don't play D&D in part for that reason, too. My statement was not something you can look at parts of. Not all reasons apply to all people, but some of them apply to a large number of people; people who want a more cinematic heroic reason avoid it for that, people who want a more robust build system for that, people who don't like linear resolution for that, people want a disad system for that--by the time you've screened out all those people, you've screened out a lot of potential fans.

Different people have different dealbreakers, but all of them matter.

[vagabond]

And there are people who don't play D&D in part for that reason, too. My statement was not something you can look at parts of. Not all reasons apply to all people, but some of them apply to a large number of people; people who want a more cinematic heroic reason avoid it for that, people who want a more robust build system for that, people who don't like linear resolution for that, people want a disad system for that--by the time you've screened out all those people, you've screened out a lot of potential fans.

Different people have different dealbreakers, but all of them matter.

I was commenting on the view that a lack of an Adv/Disadv system was a

"glaring omission" as Tywyll stated. If 80% of RPGers in the world either

are neutral to Ads/Disads, or actually dislike them (and the numbers seem

to indicate this by virtue of the number of people who play D&D and Story

Teller systems - the Merits/Flaws are not core system but showed up in the

Player Guides), the not including them is not a "glaring omission".

However, more to your point:

BRP cinematic - optional rules included for doubling HP, skills exceeding 100%,

and Fate/Hero points are included. So, more cinematic heroism - check.

Build point system - check. Maybe not as granular as some, but it is there.

And, while some stats are more important than others, how many build

point systems actually have weighted costs? GURPS doesn't. The skill buy

system in BRP is also point based. So, really, build point system - check.

Linear resolution - when you really examine how percentile rolls and multi

die rolls work out, you'll find that they can equally be linear. The bell curve

may mean that a certain value comes up more than others, but if you look

at the percentage of certain values coming up, it is linear as well. However,

since that is not what you mean, by virtue of having opposed rolls as well

as levels of success, BRP is not as "linear" as people make it out to be. Also,

using the optional rules for skills over 100% affecting opposed rolls, I find

BRP actually less "linear" than multi die systems that do not have such a

methodology.

Overall, BRP provides rules and options in the core that will appeal to the

vast majority of players. Other rules/subsystems that are not provided in

the core can be added fairly easily via houserules and supplements, including

but not limited to Ads/Disads, more granular/scalable point buy, life path

chargen, etc. But, again, people who absolutely demand such systems seem

to be in the minority. So, "glaring omissions" they are not.

-V

[Nightshade]

However, more to your point:

BRP cinematic - optional rules included for doubling HP, skills exceeding 100%,

and Fate/Hero points are included. So, more cinematic heroism - check.

Extremely modest swings in that direction; even with all those rules in play, BRP is not terribly high-cinematic. Its still plenty easy to die, and die easily, and its still hard to do too much over the top (and that only when at a very high level of skill that largely produces flat progression because of the way advancement works).

Build point system - check. Maybe not as granular as some, but it is there.

And, while some stats are more important than others, how many build

point systems actually have weighted costs? GURPS doesn't. The skill buy

system in BRP is also point based. So, really, build point system - check.

GURPS has less attributes, and among those, few that don't have a strong impact on the majority of characters. BRP has seven, at least one of which often has minimal impact on play (and frankly, for many characters INT isn't much better, and in games without paranormality or use of the Fate point idea, POW is either meaningless, or actually a mild detriment depending on what other optional rules are in use). BRP simply doesn't have a very robust build system, and that'll be obvious to anyone used to a game with a better one. Honestly, it can't have a terribly generalized one simply because of the way skills and attributes interact, but it'd need a lot more work on balancing approximate values of the attributes to even be close.

Linear resolution - when you really examine how percentile rolls and multi

die rolls work out, you'll find that they can equally be linear. The bell curve

may mean that a certain value comes up more than others, but if you look

at the percentage of certain values coming up, it is linear as well. However,

since that is not what you mean, by virtue of having opposed rolls as well

as levels of success, BRP is not as "linear" as people make it out to be. Also,

Actually, it is. Its still too common within the system to get wide swings of result, and much too hard to get reliable successes. Even more when one considers the given values for starting skill capping.

using the optional rules for skills over 100% affecting opposed rolls, I find

BRP actually less "linear" than multi die systems that do not have such a

methodology.

I doubt seriously we're talking the same thing here.

Overall, BRP provides rules and options in the core that will appeal to the

vast majority of players. Other rules/subsystems that are not provided in

I think you're seriously overestimating the degree to which these options actually support the desires of those players, because their needs are not your needs and things that seem important to them probably don't seem important to you.

the core can be added fairly easily via houserules and supplements, including

Rules that don't exist, whether easily added or not, do not attract players to a game. Far as that goes, optional rules don't either; they're going to notice the core of the design and what is and isn't there, and that's likely it.

but not limited to Ads/Disads, more granular/scalable point buy, life path

chargen, etc. But, again, people who absolutely demand such systems seem

to be in the minority. So, "glaring omissions" they are not.

-V

I don't think I said they were glaring admissions.

I do think however, that the poor support the system does for cinematic style play--and it is poor, even with all the optional rules present--does kill a lot of the demand. D&D is very high-heroic/cinematic in its biases, and always has been, and as you note, it gets the lions share of the market; once you've excluded that, you're already fishing the minority populace, so chasing away some of them is not going to be trivial.

None of this says that the game should be other than what it is, but I don't think people should kid themselves: BRP isn't popular because it lacks many features to make it popular. But having those features would largely make it a different game, to a degree than most of its current fan base likely wouldn't recognize it any more.

[vagabond]

BTW, I just verified - in the optional point buy system, INT, DEX and POW

cost 3 points, while STR, CON, SIZ and APP cost only 1 point. If the EDU

option is being exercised, it too is worth 3 points. Then, when you pick

skills, the you get INT x 10 points to spend, and with the EDU option,

EDU x 20 points. So, the 3 to 1 ratio for certain stats certainly seems

appropriate.

Depending on genre, POW can easily be the most important stat - Magic

Points for Fantasy, and Power Points for Supers. And, if horror, Sanity is

based upon POW as well.

INT, as above, affects beginning skills. It also affects learning new skills

as well as improvement.

I just don't see the flaws you do. I've used plenty of point build systems -

GURPS, James Bond (which I think has one of the best point build systems

I have ever encountered, and which could be used to model a very comprehensive

build system for BRP since it is very similar), True20, Vampire, d6, and others.

BRP's point buy option may not be par with some of those, but it isn't

bad.

As far as demand, and who BRP should aim for, I think it currently does

quite well. BRP's popularity or lack thereof falls squarely on PR. Not system.

Looking at the interest it is sparking on other boards, the popularity of

MRQ and its supplements, the interest in CoC, etc., BRP has garnered

quite bit of interest. It all depends on where you are looking.

Currently, Amazon lists BRP as #157,304, GURPS 4th Characters is at #148,041.

That is pretty comparable. Also, the new BRP book has just seen a reprint as

of 23Sep2008. That's just over 3 months between runs.

-V

Edited October 18, 2008 by vagabond

[Nightshade]

BTW, I just verified - in the optional point buy system, INT, DEX and POW

cost 3 points, while STR, CON, SIZ and APP cost only 1 point. If the EDU

option is being exercised, it too is worth 3 points. Then, when you pick

skills, the you get INT x 10 points to spend, and with the EDU option,

EDU x 20 points. So, the 3 to 1 ratio for certain stats certainly seems

appropriate.

It was a start, but its too crude; its not as bad as in some other forms of the game (where you really needed to weight Int particularly high because it was so all encompassing and couldn't be trained), but in too many settings there's too many characters who would just leave their Int and Pow at mediocre levels, dump their APP, and then top off on the other four, three of which are cheap.

Depending on genre, POW can easily be the most important stat - Magic

Points for Fantasy, and Power Points for Supers. And, if horror, Sanity is

based upon POW as well.

In a true supers game, the current rules don't give you enough to make the job anyway, and honestly, its so easy to advance Power in a magic using game that its easy to live with it at mediocre or low levels initially. And Sanity isn't used even in all horror games (in fact, I'd doubt it'd be used in most; the Lovecraftian take on this isn't close to universal there.)

INT, as above, affects beginning skills. It also affects learning new skills

as well as improvement.

But only be a few percent. The difference between a 10 and 15 Int is, after all, 5%; until you're nearly topped off most people won't even notice the effect from that.

The beginning skills are more of an issue, but given the current BRP doesn't split things out as much as some forms of the game, its still easy enough to get what you need and not miss the rest.

I just don't see the flaws you do. I've used plenty of point build systems -

GURPS, James Bond (which I think has one of the best point build systems

I have ever encountered, and which could be used to model a very comprehensive

build system for BRP since it is very similar), True20, Vampire, d6, and others.

BRP's point buy option may not be par with some of those, but it isn't

bad.

Well, keep in mind I'm comparing to to true, full-value build systems; True20, WoD and some others are hybrids; they split things into various pools of points (WoD), or have some components you just take as is (True20). BRP can't do that because there's no way to properly model how much skills are worth as compared to how stats are worth, so its another hybrid. And hybrids don't suit everyone, either (I've in fact seen people who like M&M but won't use True20 for just that reason).

Again, it doesn't matter whether it bothers you or me (for the record, it doesn't bother me appreciably); it matters if it excludes potential players. And it does.

Keep in mind, the question wasn't "Is BRP badly designed?" It was "Why don't more people like it?" That latter is the question I've been answering.

As far as demand, and who BRP should aim for, I think it currently does

quite well. BRP's popularity or lack thereof falls squarely on PR. Not system.

And I simply disagree. Its on both. I was there back during the days when RuneQuest was probably as well known a fantasy game as you could get next to D&D; it was probably as well known as any other game in the market. But it still didn't suit a lot of people because, by its nature, it was too gritty, too simulationist, and made too many assumptions they didn't like. BRP still does this.

Its possible to be a perfectly well designed game and simply not fit the tastes of most of a potential gaming populace, and I think BRP largely lands in this camp. Its simply offering an experience that in many ways is just not what a lot of people are looking for.

Now, does its relative obscurity these days help? No, it does not. But it could be ten times as well known and I doubt seriously it'd be played by more than twice the number of people it currently is.

Looking at the interest it is sparking on other boards, the popularity of

MRQ and its supplements, the interest in CoC, etc., BRP has garnered

quite bit of interest. It all depends on where you are looking.

CoC flies largely because of its genre specifics; Lovecraft would be popular with almost any system underneath it that didn't actively fail the test of telling those kinds of stories. I don't have any real sense that MRQ is particularly popular in the U.S.; I wouldn't be suprised its more popular in the Isles, because there was always a dispreportionate number of RQ playiers there even back in the day. Past that, its interest is simply because there's movement in a game system that had been largely mordant outside of CoC for a long, long time, so a lot of old fans are resurfacing.

Currently, Amazon lists BRP as #157,304, GURPS 4th Characters is at #148,041.

That is pretty comparable. Also, the new BRP book has just seen a reprint as

of 23Sep2008. That's just over 3 months between runs.

-V

I have to point out you're comparing a complete system to a portion of a system there, and need to look at the relative lead time dates.

[mrk]

I believe things will pick up. With Goodman Games doing CoC books, hopefully more people will be interested in BRP. I'd for one love to see them add BRP rules to their new Death Dealer book!

[raymond_turney]

Hi,

Don't underestimate the cost of learning a new system. Most players were basically butt-kicking or powergaming; D&D is good for that and there was nothing that was clearly better for that until World of Warcraft came along.

Also, it is harder to create a character for BRP {{any form} than for D&D. I know, I've done it a lot of times in both systems.

So you have to learn a new system, learn to GM a new system, etc. At the end of the process, you have a game that, if you are interested in butt kicking or powergaming, is not actually more fun than D&D. So BRP was pretty likely to end up taking over only those parts of the market that were interested in storytelling, wargaming, or method acting. This is a fairly small portion of the market, which BRP had to share with other competitors.

[soltakss]

I believe things will pick up. With Goodman Games doing CoC books, hopefully more people will be interested in BRP.

CoC will do fine with or without BRP. People buy it because it is CoC not because it uses BRP.

In fact, I hope that Chaosium produce supplements for more than CoC because we need pure BRP supplements - otherwise it will die a slow death.

[Ombord]

otherwise it will die a slow death.

Well, BRP has been dying a slow death since the eighties, so I wouldn't worry too much about that!

[mrk]

...i'd even say now it's become undead

[Kloster]

Hi,

Don't underestimate the cost of learning a new system. Most players were basically butt-kicking or powergaming; D&D is good for that and there was nothing that was clearly better for that until World of Warcraft came along.

Also, it is harder to create a character for BRP {{any form} than for D&D. I know, I've done it a lot of times in both systems.

So you have to learn a new system, learn to GM a new system, etc. At the end of the process, you have a game that, if you are interested in butt kicking or powergaming, is not actually more fun than D&D. So BRP was pretty likely to end up taking over only those parts of the market that were interested in storytelling, wargaming, or method acting. This is a fairly small portion of the market, which BRP had to share with other competitors.

Oh, true. I originally believed tha this small portion will increase as the original players matured, but I now tend to think it is decreasing. We always see the same figures to the non-D&D tables, as D&D tables see a continuous flow of new players.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[lars dangly]

Hi everyone; I just discovered this forum, but am a long-time BRP gamer (I bought my first copy of the RQII rules when they first hit store shelves in the late 70's and last played it a couple of weeks ago).

I think one of the sources of D&D's much greater popularity is its modular character: there is a discrete set of character types; they advance in ability on very defined and linear ways; and they complement each other in such a way that each has something different to 'do' in an adventuring party. Setting aside the question of rules, it is very easy to figure out how you are supposed to play a game that is structured like this. It's almost like playing Clue, where you take on one of several pre-defined roles. Ive never seen a variant of BRP that promotes this kind of play. It is easy to make fun of, but is actually really enjoyable and promotes fun group play. So, it is no surprise that people like it.

Another reason is that D&D, in all its incarnations, has had a huge selection of distinct monsters and magic items. So, even if every encounter you play is more or less the same ("What's that weird thing? I don't know, let's kill it! Hey, who gets to keep its zygatoscope of mystical tintintabulation?"), there is great variety in the gooey monsters you encounter and the stuff you get to collect. This too is easy to make fun of, but the proof is in the pudding: lots and lots of people have fun playing games that work this way. BRP could be played this way, but I've never seen a version that really actively promotes it.

[Ombord]

Hi everyone; I just discovered this forum, but am a long-time BRP gamer (I bought my first copy of the RQII rules when they first hit store shelves in the late 70's and last played it a couple of weeks ago).

I think one of the sources of D&D's much greater popularity is its modular character: there is a discrete set of character types; they advance in ability on very defined and linear ways; and they complement each other in such a way that each has something different to 'do' in an adventuring party. Setting aside the question of rules, it is very easy to figure out how you are supposed to play a game that is structured like this. It's almost like playing Clue, where you take on one of several pre-defined roles. Ive never seen a variant of BRP that promotes this kind of play. It is easy to make fun of, but is actually really enjoyable and promotes fun group play. So, it is no surprise that people like it.

Another reason is that D&D, in all its incarnations, has had a huge selection of distinct monsters and magic items. So, even if every encounter you play is more or less the same ("What's that weird thing? I don't know, let's kill it! Hey, who gets to keep its zygatoscope of mystical tintintabulation?"), there is great variety in the gooey monsters you encounter and the stuff you get to collect. This too is easy to make fun of, but the proof is in the pudding: lots and lots of people have fun playing games that work this way. BRP could be played this way, but I've never seen a version that really actively promotes it.

My guess as to why?

BRP was conceived as a reaction to exactly that kind of play style!

In my view, there isn't much point of having a version of BRP that tries to emulate the D&D style of play. Because, if you want that, then for the love of God, don't make your life any harder than it has to be, and use D&D!

Myself, I use BRP when I specifically wish to play something different, something more focused on characters and their personality than their stats or their bling. When I wish to enter a world where life is precious. Which I guess is the entire point of Chaosium ever inventing it!

[lars dangly]

I agree with that. I'm not questioning the rightness of Chaosium's design philosophy. My point was simply that in deciding to head off in a different direction you have automatically put yourself into a sort of niche market that won't compete with D&D and its clones. It's like a restaurant that chooses to serve up carefully made and creative food - thank god they exist, but don't expect them to replace pizza.

[AikiGhost]

My simple answer to this question is that a large number of players either instinctively like or have been trained to like RPG systems that let you "game" the system (EG: All editions of D&D but especially 3rd & 4th) or alternately are fixated on "realism" where realism = complexity and detailed weapon stats.

BRP does neither of these things and so isn't aimed at those players/GMs. BRP is essentially a simple system which in GNS terms is set about half way along the gamist/simulationist access. As such it will neither appeal to hardcore gamists (a large number of D&D style groups fall here) or to those obsessed with "Realism".

My 2 cents.

[rust]

As such it will neither appeal to hardcore gamists (a large number of D&D style groups fall here) or to those obsessed with "Realism".

Well, I am "obsessed with realism" (more precisely, complexity and plausibili-

ty), but nonetheless I consider BRP the most playable RPG system.

Besides, it is not that difficult to write BRP-based games with a rather high

level of the kind of "realism" I prefer, just take a look at the Ringworld RPG.

And in my own campaigns I use a combination of GURPS technology (by far

the most complex and "realistic" I know) and the BRP mechanics, and this

works perfectly well.

In my opinion the problem with the use of BRP for "realistic" RPGs is that it

has rarely been attempted, because the focus of BRP development usually

was on "heroic fantasy".

[Ombord]

I agree with that. I'm not questioning the rightness of Chaosium's design philosophy. My point was simply that in deciding to head off in a different direction you have automatically put yourself into a sort of niche market that won't compete with D&D and its clones. It's like a restaurant that chooses to serve up carefully made and creative food - thank god they exist, but don't expect them to replace pizza.

I see what you mean, but the food analogy falls short in that different flavors of role-playing isn't inherently cost-differentiated.

There's a good reason there's a dozen pizza parlors for each quality restaurant, and that reason is cost.

There's no equivalent reason in the role-playing market: all rpgs make for extremely low-cost entertainment.

People simply have poor taste when they prefer D&D over BRP, that's all. But seriously, apart from being first and having the biggest marketing muscles, I have no explanation why D&D is more popular than all other games combined.

[Old Man Sweeny]

I have i D&D theory which, and in expressing same i mean no offense to any D&D player:

Its pretty much a board game sold as an rpg?

I had a flick through the rules books at one stage, but upon seeing the combat chapter thats the (probably limited) conclusion i came up with.

[Ombord]

I have i D&D theory which, and in expressing same i mean no offense to any D&D player:

Its pretty much a board game sold as an rpg?

I had a flick through the rules books at one stage, but upon seeing the combat chapter thats the (probably limited) conclusion i came up with.

Whatever you feel about the current, fourth, edition; that doesn't explain the overwhelming market share of previous D&D editions: the lack of popularity for BRP (which is the topic here) certainly didn't begin with 4th edition.

[RMS]

Whatever you feel about the current, fourth, edition; that doesn't explain the overwhelming market share of previous D&D editions: the lack of popularity for BRP (which is the topic here) certainly didn't begin with 4th edition.

It didn't being with 4th edition, but there can be a serious argument that if the business decisions had been right at one point, BRP would occupy a sizeable minority of the market. Recall that Runequest was the number 2 game on the market (second to D&D of course, but it had a sizeable niche). Since that time a lot of other games have come out that compete directly in that same niche. Those are the real competitors to BRP, not D&D.

[sladethesniper]

My simple answer to this question is that a large number of players either instinctively like or have been trained to like RPG systems that let you "game" the system (EG: All editions of D&D but especially 3rd & 4th) or alternately are fixated on "realism" where realism = complexity and detailed weapon stats.

BRP does neither of these things and so isn't aimed at those players/GMs. BRP is essentially a simple system which in GNS terms is set about half way along the gamist/simulationist access. As such it will neither appeal to hardcore gamists (a large number of D&D style groups fall here) or to those obsessed with "Realism".

My 2 cents.

Um, I guess that I am going to have to agree with AikiGhost...

-STS

[GianniVacca]

there isn't much point of having a version of BRP that tries to emulate the D&D style of play

Well, here it is

BaSIC Donjons et Dragons

sorry it's in French

[Dredj]

I agree with Rust. BRP can do all that and more, but the system keeps falling into the trap as with most of the rpg industry in making the rules for each game too setting specific. The reason I overlooked BRP for so long was the Heroic Fantasy or Horror Fantasy specific tweaks to the base rules. Ironically, those games took the flexibility out of the system while trying to show off its flexibility. Take the high amount of damage mundane weapons do in CoC (higher damage than they'd do in real life), and you can pretty much forget about any other type of play style that isn't investigative or "Cosmic Horror". Plus the fact that you had to look to other games or supplements for how much each hit location can take in damage, which makes playing other styles of horror feasible.

I also side with the people that think it's poor marketing on the part of Chaosium that made BRP lag so far behind. After all, what is it about D&D that makes it any less niche than the rest of the rpg industry? In fact, it is as niche as they come, considering the system is really only designed for one style of play: dungeon crawls. Why else do they have to radically and consistently change the core rules to allow for other types of play? But speak to anyone about rpgs, and D&D and high fantasy adventures are what comes to everyone's minds, all because of marketing (and the fact that D&D was first, and it sparked the golden age of heroic fantasy in the 80's).

Edited October 27, 2008 by Dredj

[AikiGhost]

In my opinion the problem with the use of BRP for "realistic" RPGs is that it has rarely been attempted, because the focus of BRP development usually was on "heroic fantasy".

I use BRP for "Realistic" games all the time. But for many many people realism = complexity and so they steer away from BRP and play GURPS or HERO instead. That level of (unnecessary IMHO) detail just puts me off a game.