I'm curious about BRP

[Paul_Va]

So I've been playing RPGs for about 4 years now. I started with 4e before moving on to Pathfinder. After a couple of years of PF, however, I realized that I was more interested in creating interesting plots and telling gritty, realistic stories. I looked at WoD a bit, and recently I've been playing Traveller, and Savage Worlds. I was attracted to Savage Worlds because I wanted a streamlined rules system that would allow me to focus more on storytelling, and I wanted a single system that would allow me to tell any kind of story I wanted. Recently I read that Basic Roleplaying is better for telling literary, gritty games, which is ideal for me.

I'm curious though about how much work it takes to convert material from other systems to BRP. Savage Worlds makes it very easy to convert. For example, Ravenloft is my favorite setting, and Savage Worlds has an excellent Horror Companion that provides pre-made stats for most of the monsters I need to create. Is there something analogous for BRP?

[Gollum]

So I've been playing RPGs for about 4 years now. I started with 4e before moving on to Pathfinder. After a couple of years of PF, however, I realized that I was more interested in creating interesting plots and telling gritty, realistic stories. I looked at WoD a bit, and recently I've been playing Traveller, and Savage Worlds. I was attracted to Savage Worlds because I wanted a streamlined rules system that would allow me to focus more on storytelling, and I wanted a single system that would allow me to tell any kind of story I wanted. Recently I read that Basic Roleplaying is better for telling literary, gritty games, which is ideal for me.

I'm curious though about how much work it takes to convert material from other systems to BRP. Savage Worlds makes it very easy to convert. For example, Ravenloft is my favorite setting, and Savage Worlds has an excellent Horror Companion that provides pre-made stats for most of the monsters I need to create. Is there something analogous for BRP?

Hi!

First, I really think that BRP should be a good choice for what you are looking for. Indeed, this game has a huge edge: it is very flexible. Very. You can add or remove optional rules as you want to get exactly the kind of game that you want. Do you want hit location rules? You've got them. You don't like hit locations and prefere describing injuries depending on the amount of damage inflicted by the attack? No problem! The hit location rules are just optional. And everything is like that. So, the game is very friendly because there is no official way to play it. Just use the rules that best fit to the genre of game and the atmosphere you desire for your games.

Furthermore, no matter how many optional rules you use. They are all designed to be as intuitive and easy to play as possible. No complex calculation in BRP. Everything is made to let the GM describe things as he wants and to let the players play their role as they imagine it, without hindering them with complex game mechanics.

I come from GURPS, that I played during more than 20 years now, and I am very happy to have switched for BRP. GURPS is a very good game but BRP is much more intuitive and, as GM, decisions are very easy to take without having to look through the books. Almost everything you need to know is written down on the character sheet and the rest is very quick to memorize.

Now, to answer to your precise question, BRP uses a percentil system. Almost everything is rated in percentage and, so, it is easy to convert adventures or rules from another game... As long as it is easy to know the chance of success in this other game (which is not always the case, unfortunately, especially when several dice are rolled and added together).

But there is something even more simple. This "chart" which is the "spirit" of BRP:

05% or less : novice

06%-25%: neophyte

26%-50%: amateur

51%-75%: professional

76%-90%: expert

91% and more: master

You want an expert in karate? Brawling 80%, Martial Arts 80%, and you are fine. You want a good Professional school teacher? Teaching 70% fits.

Refering to this table is much more useful than complicated calculations and, eventually, much more precise: the character will best fit to what he is supposed to be in his original game system.

As you can see, BRP is one of the games (if not THE game) who best fit to the saying: less is more. But if you still want more, you still have a lot of interesting optional rules...

Edited April 23, 2013 by Gollum

[KjetilKverndokken]

I'm curious though about how much work it takes to convert material from other systems to BRP. Savage Worlds makes it very easy to convert. For example, Ravenloft is my favorite setting, and Savage Worlds has an excellent Horror Companion that provides pre-made stats for most of the monsters I need to create. Is there something analogous for BRP?

As a long time BRP player and Savage Worlds player - yes, the core book has many Horror monsters in the book - and on the Chaosium website there are more books on it.

The biggest difference in the easy scale between BRP and SW, is that NPC's takes a bit longer to make (Unless the SW critters have a lot of edges and hindrnaces, then BRP is faster).

It would be dead easy to do this - I am at this moment converting stuff from the highly complex Alpha Omega system to BRP and from the dead boring rules of Dark Heresy to BRP - and it flows like a dream .

As soons as you see how the BRP stats scale, you should be able to see what fits best for a direct conversion between BRP and SW only critters.

[smjn]

For BRP Ravenloft you might want to chech out this thread on RPG.net. As it turns out Chaot is running a Ravenloft campaign using Magic World, the "new" fantasy iteration of BRP.

[Paul_Va]

For BRP Ravenloft you might want to chech out this thread on RPG.net. As it turns out Chaot is running a Ravenloft campaign using Magic World, the "new" fantasy iteration of BRP.

Thanks for that link. That's exactly the kind of information I'm looking for.

[Paul_Va]

I looked at the example of the Strahd conversion. Do D20 attribute stats transfer almost "as is"? Also, I just finished reading the free quickstart, and I didn't notice the base attributes affect the skills in anyway. Are skills completely unaffected by the base attributes? Maybe there are optional rules in the full core rulebook for this?

[KjetilKverndokken]

I looked at the example of the Strahd conversion. Do D20 attribute stats transfer almost "as is"? Also, I just finished reading the free quickstart, and I didn't notice the base attributes affect the skills in anyway. Are skills completely unaffected by the base attributes? Maybe there are optional rules in the full core rulebook for this?

You can use an optional rule that lets attributes give a small % to skills.

In a way, you could transfer directly from D20 - not totally accurate, but works.

Edited April 23, 2013 by KjetilKverndokken

[smjn]

I just finished reading the free quickstart, and I didn't notice the base attributes affect the skills in anyway. Are skills completely unaffected by the base attributes? Maybe there are optional rules in the full core rulebook for this?

Yes, in the default rules the Characteristics do not affect skills in any way, except four (if I counted correctly) whose starting percentage is based on a Stat: Own Language (INT/EDUx5%), Gaming (INT+POW), Dodge (DEXx02%) and Projection (also DEXx02%).

There is, however, the optional rule Skill Category Bonuses that give a small bonus to each category based on the Stats.

Also, each stat except SIZ has a related Characteristic Roll, which is usually 5 times the stat as a percentage, unless the GM makes the situation more difficult. These are Effort for STR, Stamina for CON, Idea for INT, Luck for POW, Agility for DEX, Charisma for APP and Know for EDU. These can be used when there is no applicable skill to handle a situation. E.g. if a character needs to stay awake during a watch after a long march they will roll for Stamina, perhaps with a penalty.

Stats are also used to resist stuff like poison and magic on the resistance table, so they are useful, even if they don't affect skills much.

[Nakana]

Welcome to Basic Roleplaying! The forum and the system.

Both are awesome and have become my #1 choice!

[Paul_Va]

Welcome to Basic Roleplaying! The forum and the system.

Both are awesome and have become my #1 choice!

Thank you for the warm welcome, Nakana.

[pansophy]

whose starting percentage is based on a Stat: Own Language (INT/EDUx5%), Gaming (INT+POW), Dodge (DEXx02%) and Projection (also DEXx02%).

You forgot to mention First Aid. In Modern and Future Settings the value is 30% flat out, but in Historic/Fantasy settings it is INT*1. Depending on setting, "Fly" also depends on an Attribute.

Also, the optional rule "Skill Category Bonuses" is nice and adds a bit of flavour. In the beginning I was thinking Attributes should affect Skills in higher detail, but after a while I came to conclusion that skills are really independent of a persons Attributes. Attributes can limit a persons Skills, but they do not really affect them too much. To me a skill is 90% knowledge/technique and the rest might be effects triggered by Attributes. But that is only my opinion. Other people might be thinking different.

[Gollum]

Also, the optional rule "Skill Category Bonuses" is nice and adds a bit of flavour. In the beginning I was thinking Attributes should affect Skills in higher detail, but after a while I came to conclusion that skills are really independent of a persons Attributes. Attributes can limit a persons Skills, but they do not really affect them too much. To me a skill is 90% knowledge/technique and the rest might be effects triggered by Attributes. But that is only my opinion. Other people might be thinking different.

My opinion about this topic is about the same, despite of the fact that I played GURPS for a very long time (in GURPS, attributes have a huge impact on skills).

Attributes do influence skills. There is no doubt about that. Someone clever will learn to play chess much faster than someone stupid and absent minded, and someone strong and agile will learn boxing much faster than someone feeble and clumsy. It is impossible to become a champion in a skill for which once is handicapped and world class champions are not only trained, they are also outstandingly talented for what they do: in game terms, they have characteristics which make them unbeatable. Champion boxers are for instance always very strong strong and healthy while world class scientists are always amazingly bright...

Having said that, learning and training is still more important than innate abilities. You can be as bright as you want, if you barely know chess rules, someone less intelligent than you but with a lot of training will always win, and very easily.

So, in my humble opinion, attributes have a high influence at the beginning. Between two neophytes or amateur, they will make a lot of difference. But once both of them will become expert, it will be hard to know what makes them so good: talents or training? Mozart and Einstein were certainly incredibly talented, but they also spent an incredible amount of time practicing their skill.

Finally, learning a skill is not just learning how to practice it. When you learn boxing, for instance, you also make a lot of muscle training exercises which make you become more and strong and healthy. Likewise, learning a science doesn't only make you good for that one science, it also changes your point of view on the world and even your general manner of thinking... Brief, it changes your intelligence.

Then the true question would be: do attributes influence skills or do skills influence attributes? And my personal answer is: both.

That is why, in my humble opinion, the Basic Role Playing system do a very good job in this topic. With the optional rule, attributes have a little influence on skills. About -10% to +10%. This little influence is important at the beginning, when skills are low, but has much less influence when they become higher.

Furthermore, the responsibility to create characters with skill corresponding to their attributes is left to GM and players. If someone wants an Acrobatics 95% character with a Dexterity of 3, the GM can content himself with saying: “Sorry but your character can't do acrobatics at all.” Common sense is often the best rule.

Edited April 24, 2013 by Gollum

[vagabond]

My opinion about this topic is about the same, despite of the fact that I played GURPS for a very long time (in GURPS, attributes have a huge impact on skills).

Attributes do influence skills. There is no doubt about that. Someone clever will learn to play chess much faster than someone stupid and absent minded, and someone strong and agile will learn boxing much faster than someone feeble and clumsy. It is impossible to become a champion in a skill for which once is handicapped and world class champions are not only trained, they are also outstandingly talented for what they do: in game terms, they have characteristics which make them unbeatable. Champion boxers are for instance always very strong strong and healthy while world class scientists are always amazingly bright...

Having said that, learning and training is still more important than innate abilities. You can be as bright as you want, if you barely know chess rules, someone less intelligent than you but with a lot of training will always win, and very easily.

So, in my humble opinion, attributes have a high influence at the beginning. Between two neophytes or amateur, they will make a lot of difference. But once both of them will become expert, it will be hard to know what makes them so good: talents or training? Mozart and Einstein were certainly incredibly talented, but they also spent an incredible amount of time practicing their skill.

Finally, learning a skill is not just learning how to practice it. When you learn boxing, for instance, you also make a lot of muscle training exercises which make you become more and strong and healthy. Likewise, learning a science doesn't only make you good for that one science, it also changes your point of view on the world and even your general manner of thinking... Brief, it changes your intelligence.

Then the true question would be: do attributes influence skills or do skills influence attributes? And my personal answer is: both.

That is why, in my humble opinion, the Basic Role Playing system do a very good job in this topic. With the optional rule, attributes have a little influence on skills. About -10% to +10%. This little influence is important at the beginning, when skills are low, but has much less influence when they become higher.

Furthermore, the responsibility to create characters with skill corresponding to their attributes is left to GM and players. If someone wants an Acrobatics 95% character with a Dexterity of 3, the GM can content himself with saying: “Sorry but your character can't do acrobatics at all.” Common sense is often the best rule.

I've always liked either having attributes set the starting/default skill level, representing raw innate ability, and then as the skills improve, this raw innate ability is superseded by training. So, with attributes typically in the 3 - 18 range, or a base modifier up to +15, the same can be accomplished. Another option would be to base skill improvement on current skill level, modified by the primary ability and INT to represent both capacity for learning as well as raw talent.

Ian

[Witigis]

Hi!

First, I really think that BRP should be a good choice for what you are looking for. Indeed, this game has a huge edge: it is very flexible. Very. You can add or remove optional rules as you want to get exactly the kind of game that you want. Do you want hit location rules? You've got them. You don't like hit locations and prefere describing injuries depending on the amount of damage inflicted by the attack? No problem! The hit location rules are just optional. And everything is like that. So, the game is very friendly because there is no official way to play it. Just use the rules that best fit to the genre of game and the atmosphere you desire for your games.

Furthermore, no matter how many optional rules you use. They are all designed to be as intuitive and easy to play as possible. No complex calculation in BRP. Everything is made to let the GM describe things as he wants and to let the players play their role as they imagine it, without hindering them with complex game mechanics.

I come from GURPS, that I played during more than 20 years now, and I am very happy to have switched for BRP. GURPS is a very good game but BRP is much more intuitive and, as GM, decisions are very easy to take without having to look through the books. Almost everything you need to know is written down on the character sheet and the rest is very quick to memorize...

I wholeheartedly agree with that. I played a lot of Roleplaying games during the last, oh, thirty years, and became stuck with GURPS for a long time, because it allowed me and my players to use different settings with one set of rules. The same is definitely true for BRP AND it is easier to use with certain settings. At least, our group back then quickly got the opinion, that GURPS best fitted settings centered around humans or humanoids, while some of the stock fantasy monsters (like, lets say, dragons) did not fit as well with the game system. I have not played a fantasy setting with BRP yet, but the system seems to bridge that gap better.

I also found, that it is easier to adapt to other worlds and settings because of the percentage-based system. After GURPS I have long sought for a game system, allowing me to change settings fairly easy, but keeping the game system. Right now I guess, I have found it with BRP. Savage Worlds, which you mentioned, simply seems not able to provide me with the right mixture between playability and reality (I cannot get into these exploding dice business...).

[Chaot]

Hiyo!

For BRP Ravenloft you might want to chech out this thread on RPG.net. As it turns out Chaot is running a Ravenloft campaign using Magic World, the "new" fantasy iteration of BRP.

Thanks for the plug. There's an actual play thread over here too. Only two sessions in.

I looked at the example of the Strahd conversion. Do D20 attribute stats transfer almost "as is"? Also, I just finished reading the free quickstart, and I didn't notice the base attributes affect the skills in anyway. Are skills completely unaffected by the base attributes? Maybe there are optional rules in the full core rulebook for this?

I think stats transfer over pretty well when you are talking things in the normal human range. I bumped Strahd's stats up by a significant degree because I felt that it fit him as a powerful vampire better. Here's an example of this.

Doctor Victor Mordenheim

STR 10

CON 9

SIZ 14

INT 19

POW 7


DEX 17


CHA 12

The doctor as I stated him. Looking back now I think I'd drop his Dex down to 15 or so, actually. Still, he's pretty in line with an average human and probably pretty close to his AD&D stats. I'd have to pull out the book to make sure.

Meanwhile, I pegged his monster as this.

Adam, The Monster

STR 50

CON 25

SIZ 19

INT 16

POW 1 (25)

DEX 17

CHA 12

Significantly higher than the AD&D stats, I think, but more representative of a BRP monster (as I would run it).

But there is something even more simple. This "chart" which is the "spirit" of BRP:

05% or less : novice

06%-25%: neophyte

26%-50%: amateur

51%-75%: professional

76%-90%: expert

91% and more: master

I think Gollum is spot on here. I usually break the percentages down a little differently but it's the same concept. Once you have an idea of the skill levels and how they mesh with your player's skill levels it all kind of falls into place. When I'm actually running I tend not to have this stuff stated out ahead of time.

Town guard?

35% short sword 1d6+1d4, 10 hp.

Spot Hidden 45%, Collect Gate Tax 76%, Accept Bribe 20%

If I need to give this guard a special ability, like Rat's Vision or something, just not it in there. If the guard becomes important, he can easily be fleshed out more without changing the information I've already written down.

As for the extensive conversion stuff, I like to approach it more as what I want the effect to be in my game rather than what the original stats did in the original game. Once I have the idea I just mash things together. For the Ravenloft conversions I was taking written up NPCs from the Digests and adding or subtracting points where it seemed appropriate, combining them with other NPCs, starting from scratch with the standard character generation rules... whatever seemed appropriate, easiest and whatever struck me as the most fun to do.

[Dyvim Matt]

As for the extensive conversion stuff, I like to approach it more as what I want the effect to be in my game rather than what the original stats did in the original game. Once I have the idea I just mash things together. For the Ravenloft conversions I was taking written up NPCs from the Digests and adding or subtracting points where it seemed appropriate, combining them with other NPCs, starting from scratch with the standard character generation rules... whatever seemed appropriate, easiest and whatever struck me as the most fun to do.

Very, very much this.

I have tried to convert various game worlds to BRP over the years, some more easily than others. My attempts included HârnWorld, the World of Darkness, Shadowrun, Ravenloft (a pretty popular choice for conversion! ) and Dark Heresy. The common denominator in most cases is that you can't perfectly emulate all the rules of every game.

I find that overall, if you want to play a game that is just like another game, but with BRP, it's pretty easy to do, but translating every minute detail can require some homework. In both cases, it is very much worth it.

Oh, and welcome aboard!

[Atgxtg]

Attributes can have a bigger impact if you use the RQ3 method for skill advancement. In RQ3 the category modifiers (attack, parry, knowledge, etc.) are added to improvement rolls. So somebody with an attack bonus of +10% not only starts with a higher starting skill, but also tends to roll over his skill rating more often, and his weapon skills will increase faster. IMO, the bonus to improvement rolls has a bigger impact that the adjustment to starting percentages.

[Paul_Va]

Chaot, thank you for the explanation of your conversions. That is very insightful. I think I tend to overthink conversions, but it's because I'm something of a perfectionist. And I will definitely check out your game thread.

My attempts included HârnWorld, the World of Darkness, Shadowrun, Ravenloft (a pretty popular choice for conversion! ) and Dark Heresy.

Ravenloft has always been my preferred fantasy setting. Although I haven't tried my hand at Cthulhu yet.

[Dyvim Matt]

I haven't tried my hand at Cthulhu yet.

It is not to everyone's tastes, but I find Call of Cthulhu is one of my favorite versions of BRP. I highly recommend to try a modern day game, maybe with bits of the Big Gold Book included to taste, or Cthulhu Dark Ages. I am not a big fan of classic era (1920s-1930s) CoC, but then again, I played quite a few excellent games in the 1920s.

[Paul_Va]

It is not to everyone's tastes, but I find Call of Cthulhu is one of my favorite versions of BRP. I highly recommend to try a modern day game, maybe with bits of the Big Gold Book included to taste, or Cthulhu Dark Ages. I am not a big fan of classic era (1920s-1930s) CoC, but then again, I played quite a few excellent games in the 1920s.

Well, to be honest, part of the reason I haven't investigated the game is that I've never read much Lovecraft, and I didn't want to spoil the reading. Lovecraft is one of those writers I've always meant to get around to. I'm actually in the process of reading his entire oeuvre from beginning to end right now, however, so that problem will soon be remedied.

[filbanto]

Since we're on Ravenloft... I've always been interested in it, but felt it was too disjointed. The biggest stumbling block for me is the inclusion of Elves, Dwarves and Hobbits. The widely disparate tech levels is also a little squirrelly. For a very cool blog with some interesting ideas to re-imagine the setting take a look at:

talesofthegrotesqueanddungeonesque.blogspot.com/

The author also has some excellent downloads for running a Gothic horror setting using D&D, but you could port over to BRP pretty easily. One thing that would be cool to develop is his fear and revulsion (not sure I got the names right) mechanics. Fear is how scary something is: seeing a werewolf will have you shaking in your boots. Revulsion is a mechanic for how disturbing/disgusting something is: stumbling across a rotting corpse will have you puking on your boots. The BRP Sanity mechanics don't really cover this, being geared towards cosmic horror.

[Paul_Va]

Since we're on Ravenloft... I've always been interested in it, but felt it was too disjointed. The biggest stumbling block for me is the inclusion of Elves, Dwarves and Hobbits. The widely disparate tech levels is also a little squirrelly. For a very cool blog with some interesting ideas to re-imagine the setting take a look at:

talesofthegrotesqueanddungeonesque.blogspot.com/

The author also has some excellent downloads for running a Gothic horror setting using D&D, but you could port over to BRP pretty easily. One thing that would be cool to develop is his fear and revulsion (not sure I got the names right) mechanics. Fear is how scary something is: seeing a werewolf will have you shaking in your boots. Revulsion is a mechanic for how disturbing/disgusting something is: stumbling across a rotting corpse will have you puking on your boots. The BRP Sanity mechanics don't really cover this, being geared towards cosmic horror.

Wow, Filbanto, thank you for directing me to this blog. It looks great! I agree that some things in Ravenloft are a bit quirky. When your only exposure to RPGs is the high-fantasy, wizbang of D&D, however, the gritty darkness of Ravenloft can be a welcome island of respite. For what it's worth, the tech levels and elf/halfling issues are somewhat remedied in the Gothic Earth setting, which in some ways I think is superior. I tend to play down the high fantasy elements of the setting.

[Gollum]

It is not to everyone's tastes, but I find Call of Cthulhu is one of my favorite versions of BRP. I highly recommend to try a modern day game, maybe with bits of the Big Gold Book included to taste, or Cthulhu Dark Ages. I am not a big fan of classic era (1920s-1930s) CoC, but then again, I played quite a few excellent games in the 1920s.

I do agree. It is either my favourite version of the game. But be careful, though! Call of Cthulhu is also one of the deadliest version of BRP!

In Call of Cthulhu, kicks do 1d6 damage for instance. Which means that a martial artist with a the littlest damage bonus (+1d4) will always kill a man in only two kicks: 1d6+1d6+1d4 gives an average of 9.5 points of damage, that is 19 points of damage for two kicks.

[Gollum]

The author also has some excellent downloads for running a Gothic horror setting using D&D, but you could port over to BRP pretty easily. One thing that would be cool to develop is his fear and revulsion (not sure I got the names right) mechanics. Fear is how scary something is: seeing a werewolf will have you shaking in your boots. Revulsion is a mechanic for how disturbing/disgusting something is: stumbling across a rotting corpse will have you puking on your boots. The BRP Sanity mechanics don't really cover this, being geared towards cosmic horror.

Puking on your boots, screaming, etc., is exactly how I interpret a failed sanity roll which doesn't make the character loose enough sanity point to become crazy... It is what happen most of the time with corpses (they rarely make loose 5 sanity points or more).

Now, for disgusting things which are not frightening at all (like a lot of vomit on the floor, for instance), I would ask the player to make a POW x 5 roll without any relation to sanity points. Maybe even a CON x 5 roll.

Dead bodies are always frightening, though, because they inevitably make you think to danger and to your own death.

[Chaot]

I think I tend to overthink conversions, but it's because I'm something of a perfectionist.

This might interest you: Converting AD&D to RuneQuest Guide, written by Bryan Maloney. It's a more disciplined look at conversions. I'm firmly of the opinion that there's no wrong way to approach this stuff, just preferred ways. I've also recently picked up a mantra for new players who have experience with other systems. Don't overthink it. The rules run very quietly in the background. Worrying about them too much distracts from the game with little added benefit. Then again, my style of play isn't as tactical as other prefer and I'm more likely to dish out bonuses (or just down right declare success) if an action entertains me.

talesofthegrotesqueanddungeonesque.blogspot.com/

That site is really lovely. I only came across it recently. Real fun stuff. I have also cut the demi-humans, by the way. I tend to dislike when they are shoehorned into a setting when they really don't add anything.

Puking on your boots, screaming, etc., is exactly how I interpret a failed sanity roll which doesn't make the character loose enough sanity point to become crazy... It is what happen most of the time with corpses (they rarely make loose 5 sanity points or more).

I'm using the Madness Meter from Unknown Armies and my madness roll is an average of INT and CON x 5 roll. I'm actually tempted to drop it down to a x4 or x3 because the PCs are becoming hardened pretty quickly. Still, in the two sessions we've had we've had a failure lead to puking in the bushes and a failure lead to a manic charge towards their own death, so it's working pretty well in general.