Impatient!

[Archivist]

Revolution D100 is coming out this Summer...

BRP Essentials + Genre Packs (or whatever they call them) is coming out ...

As I am SUPER impatient for both of these, is there a 3rd "Best of BRP + Modernizations + Generic" that I can get now (other than BRP Gold, which is cool but (a) isn't officially supported anymore; (b) didn't include the cool modernization bits that you have to hack in from other places).

Thanks!

[auyl]

Could look at some of the monographs on Dtrpg. Won't be supported true but shouldn't take much to add them into the new BRP.

[Chaot]

A 3rd!?  Man, now you're just getting greedy.

The nice thing is there are so many BRP genre books now you can pick what you want and strip out/adapt the rules to your preferred poison.

[Simlasa]

What are 'modernization bits'?

 

[Archivist]

Oh, I should have been more specific. Examples of what I mean:

- Blood Tide or Pirates and Dragons Stunting mechanic (I've forgotten what it's called, but its essentially cool stunts)

- Renaissance D100/Pirates and Dragons alternate Progression system (essentially experience points)

- Some system (i forget where) getting rid of the Resistance table.

etc., just the kind of nice/clean up bits that are easy to add when you make a game from scratch. BRP Gold (now out of print and not really supported) to the best of my knowledge was a clean up and consolidation, not a "lets add these other new bits" project. )

I'm always looking for the perfect Generic system, and yet remain disappointed and hopeful ;-)

[Simlasa]

6 minutes ago, Archivist said:

I'm always looking for the perfect Generic system, and yet remain disappointed and hopeful ;-)

Yeah, good luck with finding the 'perfect' anything.

Lots of options for BRP though... in the BGB and elsewhere.

RQ6 and CoC7 both went for opposed rolls rather than the Resistance Formula (Table).

[auyl]

1 hour ago, Simlasa said:

Yeah, good luck with finding the 'perfect' anything.

Lots of options for BRP though... in the BGB and elsewhere.

I agree, you'll never find the "perfect" system, but there are a few that get darned close for me, hence why I bought and published the rules I did.

And there is lots of material that you can use in any d100 game, just might have to put some minor work into making it fit in whatever BRP model you are currently using.

[Archivist]

Yea, from tinkering it seems like BRP is much more easily hackable than say, GURPS, which is super hackable but the system mastery required to hack GURPS "correctly" is much higher.

[Baulderstone]

I wouldn't really worry about what is supported anymore. I am prepping an RQ6 campaign at the moment, and I had no real problems using bits from earlier editions of RQ (and offshoots like OpenQuest), from the BGB, from Stormbringer, from the Revolution D100 beta and from Renaissance. Some Delta Green might even end up in there somewhere. While I like the "modernized" base of RQ6 to build on, there are a lot wonderful bits and pieces in unsupported lines of BRP that I can stick on it. 

I agree with you on GURPS. I went over to GURPS as my go-to system during the late '80s and early '90s, and it is a good system that works well. It's just a lot more work to get it to do what I want than it is with BRP, at least for the way my brain works. 

[Mankcam]

I am using RQ6 as a base system these days, which allows me to use Legend and OpenQuest/Renaissance supplements with ease, and it's reasonably simple to port Call Of Cthulhu and BRP BGB games as well.

The whole BRP line is very hackable.

For example, Amazing Adventures attracted me but did not have the meat on the bone I was looking for, and I had given up waiting for Pulp Cthulhu. 

So I am now running Pulp Era characters built from RQ6, using a tweaked version of the Stunts from BloodTide for that cinematic pulpy experience.

Because it is Pulp, I use a Mooks system as the default combat system and switch to RQ6 combat when using major villains or if I want the combat to be particularly dramatic. I'm running Call of Cthulhu scenarios with a pulp touch, so we are slowly working our way through The Masks Of Nylarthotep at present.

It's all great fun, and it works well, no issues with playing a bastardised hybrid like this, which would be a nightmare to do in many other rpg systems.

But I understand why the OP is frustrated, I would rather wait for more official games to come out to do what I'm after (where are you Pulp Cthulhu?), but at the end of the day there isn't many issues mixing the BRP family of games together

Edited January 22, 2016 by Mankcam

[colinabrett]

Do we have a release date for BRP Essentials? I have a mind to update a couple of my earlier projects, both of which were built around the BGB, but I'd like to see BRP Essentials before I really get started. Any ideas?

Slightly off-topic, to those who have hacked together bits of BRP versions: how many rulebooks do you take to a given game session? The BGB is great but if you're taking parts from that, RQ6, Renaissance, MW (or whichever system(s) you're using), do you take all the books "just in case" or hand-written/typed summaries of the relevant sections? Or, because BRP is almost like Lego in the way bits from different systems "click together", can you just trust to memory that a particular rules variant works a certain way?

Regards,

Colin

[clarence]

I interviewed MOB recently for the Swedish RPG magazine Fenix, and it seems they are aiming for a release this summer to bring it to Gen Con. Very much looking forward to this : )

[K Peterson]

8 hours ago, ColinBrett said:

Slightly off-topic, to those who have hacked together bits of BRP versions: how many rulebooks do you take to a given game session? The BGB is great but if you're taking parts from that, RQ6, Renaissance, MW (or whichever system(s) you're using), do you take all the books "just in case" or hand-written/typed summaries of the relevant sections? Or, because BRP is almost like Lego in the way bits from different systems "click together", can you just trust to memory that a particular rules variant works a certain way?

At most, one rulebook and potentially one GM screen are brought to the gaming table.

I typically work from one rules framework, and import subsystems from other BRP systems. I bring the core book from the framework and I have printed notes for the framework and subsystems. These system cheat sheets include details on task resolution, chargen, combat, and any subsystem that would be appropriate.

For example, I'm working on Hyperborean fantasy campaign that is using Elric! for its framework, and includes subsystems taken from RQ3 (strike ranks and training), and from Corum and the Bronze Grimoire (magic). The Elric! core, its GM screen, and my cheat sheets would be what I'd have on-hand for game sessions.

 

[Archivist]

Arg, thanks. Now I looked at RQ6 and I want those cool bits in a generic system too.

[Baulderstone]

On 1/22/2016 at 6:55 PM, Mankcam said:

Because it is Pulp, I use a Mooks system as the default combat system and switch to RQ6 combat when using major villains or if I want the combat to be particularly dramatic. I'm running Call of Cthulhu scenarios with a pulp touch, so we are slowly working our way through The Masks Of Nylarthotep at present.

Pulped-out Masks of Nyarlathotep is one of the most fun things I have ever run.  

[Baulderstone]

17 hours ago, ColinBrett said:

Slightly off-topic, to those who have hacked together bits of BRP versions: how many rulebooks do you take to a given game session? The BGB is great but if you're taking parts from that, RQ6, Renaissance, MW (or whichever system(s) you're using), do you take all the books "just in case" or hand-written/typed summaries of the relevant sections? Or, because BRP is almost like Lego in the way bits from different systems "click together", can you just trust to memory that a particular rules variant works a certain way?

I'll take the base system's core book, which at the moment is RQ 6. The GM's Pack for RQ6 contains all the tables and reference for the game. I have printed those out and stapled them into smaller reference packets (Character Generation, Combat, Magic, Special Effects). I might have multiples of some packets to share with players, like the Special Effect one. I really don't like GM screens as a wall between me and players, so these packets work best for me. 

If I need a subsystem from another game, I can just print up the pages covering it from the PDF, and add it to my reference packets. 

5 hours ago, Archivist said:

Arg, thanks. Now I looked at RQ6 and I want those cool bits in a generic system too.

The RQ6 core combined with the modern and future rules in Luther Arkwright make for a pretty comprehensive generic system. 

[Archivist]

Is there a 2nd edition of Luther Arkwright out? I read a review of the 1st edition and it was very negative.

[cjbowser]

There are multiple version, not editions. There was a game produced in the 90s and then the RQ version, which came out last year.They have no connection other than subject matter.

This is the version you want:https://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/178202/luther-arkwright-roleplaying-across-parallels

Here's Runeslinger's review: https://runeslinger.wordpress.com/2015/07/19/luther-arkwright-roleplaying-across-the-parallels-part-1/

And a review by Paul Baldowski on geek native: http://www.geeknative.com/tag/luther-arkwright/

 

Edited January 24, 2016 by cjbowser

[Archivist]

 omg thanks it sounds SOOOOO good.

 

[Archivist]

Does RQ6 have an extended contest mechanism (2 or one side trying to accumulate successes over a period of time)? I didn't see it in the essentials.

[Baulderstone]

24 minutes ago, Archivist said:

Does RQ6 have an extended contest mechanism (2 or one side trying to accumulate successes over a period of time)? I didn't see it in the essentials.

Not in the Essentials edition. In the Equipment chapter of the full edition, there are rules for crafting superior equipment and adding enhancements. It takes place over a number of task rounds that can be limited by time, resources and budget. The final result can be a shoddy, defective product or one with enhancements to utility or value. 

While the system is specific to crafting, it wouldn't take a huge amount of effort to re-skin it for a task like trying to whip a bunch of ragtag peasants into a defensive fighting force in just a few days. 

Without going into the specifics of the mechanics, at the end of the task rounds, you get a result from the process that is a percentage value (which may be over 100%). Getting 100% is a solid success, while falling below that is a poor result, and increments above 100% give benefits.

Crafting is a one-sided affair, but the final percentage value the system provides would make it easy to use as a comparison for situations where multiple sides are competing. 

[Archivist]

Hmm... I wonder if one of the BRP variants has them. Savage Worlds and Chronicles of Darkness both do and they're pretty fun.

[colinabrett]

50 minutes ago, Archivist said:

Does RQ6 have an extended contest mechanism (2 or one side trying to accumulate successes over a period of time)? I didn't see it in the essentials.

I wrote an extended test mechanism for my BRP LotR rules (available around here somewhere). It's completely untested, so I don't know if it will be of any use:

 

Skill Versus Skill – Method Two (Experimental, untested)
These rules might suit “extended test” situations where two characters are locked in a struggle over
a period of time. Such cases would include large scale tactical battles, games of chess, trading or
diplomatic negotiations and so on.
Divide each character's percentile skill by 5 and round fractions normally. This will give a number
between 1 and 20 (for most characters). Each character then decides their goal or the GM can
determine the victory conditions. The contest then plays out as follows:

• Make a roll for each character on the Resistance Table
• If both succeed or both fail, there is no outcome yet and the contest continues
• If one side scores a critical success while the other scores a normal success (or a fumble and a
• normal failure occur) then the contest continues with the advantage - say an extra 1D6 onto the
• score - going to the side which scored the critical or normal failure
• If one character succeeds and the other fails, victory is achieved
• If a critical success or fumble is rolled, the winner scores a big victory

In an extended contest the GM can set a victory level (say, first to five) and the struggle would not
be over after the first win. Such contests could take days or weeks of game time to conclude.
The winning character gets one skill improvement roll, no matter how many rolls he may have
made.

 

EDIT: On reflection, this works a little like Spirit Combat, where MP vs MP are matched and the winner drains 1D3 MP from the loser. When one combatant's MP reaches zero, the combat is over (the spirit is driven off or the mortal is possessed by the spirit). 

Edited January 24, 2016 by ColinBrett
Additional thought

[Mankcam]

10 hours ago, Baulderstone said:

 

Without going into the specifics of the mechanics, at the end of the task rounds, you get a result from the process that is a percentage value (which may be over 100%). Getting 100% is a solid success, while falling below that is a poor result, and increments above 100% give benefits.

Actually I was just discussing this with a friend that it would be pretty easy to use a rule like the RQ6 task rounds mechanic for extended contested rolls if you want to add more drama to a situation.

I also stumbled across the concept in an earlier thread, so it's probably being used by a lot of GMs already. 

It's difficult to elaborate on it further without disclosing the actual rules mechanics, but it's certainly worth looking at the concept of task rounds from RQ6 Crafting and using this with opposed rolls for dramatic scenes.

The other solution would be to decree that differential rolls replace opposed rolls in dramatic situations, but this may be cumbersome as you would need to have a list of specific effects able to be used for successful rolls, just like in a combat scene- I'm not saying it cannot be done, and I can see it working for particular situations that the GM may want the spotlight on.

However I think I prefer using task rounds for opposed rolls would not involve GM prep at all, and would be a simple way of building the drama and tension, and it is consistent with mechanics already in the book.

Edited January 25, 2016 by Mankcam

[g33k]

Note (with regard to "not disclosing mechanics") -- the game mechanics cannot be (c)opyrighted, so it's perfectly-legal to "disclose" them and discuss them.  It's only the actual words in the specific order chosen by the author/editor/publisher, specifically expressing the rules, that are (c)'able.  Any paraphrase may be freely made -- even offered for sale!

Discussion on a forum is probably sufficiently fair-use that even direct quotation is probably protected...

So, talk freely!