Q&A with the new BRP Author

[Nightshade]

As with Call of Cthulhu and Stormbringer.

You have a short skill description, a list of skills that are appropriate for someone of that profession, and a suggested wealth level. You get a lump of skill points to distribute across those skills.

Later, you get another lump of skill points for personal interests (skills outside those designated as professional skills).

If you have powers defined by skill points, you can spend skill points from an appropriate pool. For example, a priest with magic spells might spend professional skill points on spells, but a psychic police officer would spend personal interest points for psychic powers.

Ah, I see. Its a bit more structured than I'd taken away from your earlier answer. I'd assumed it was just "spend on what seems appropriate."

[Nightshade]

Of course.

But it should seem obvious that there is a tremendous amount of trust assumed between the GM and the players.

I'm not sure that degree of trust is always warrented, to be honest; even a GM who means well can have lapses of judgment, and when it comes to something like this, that sort of lapse can be seriously off-putting.

[Simlasa]

I'd be more 'offput' if it went the other way... someone tells me we are playing Call Of Cthulhu but it turns out all the wierd stuff going on is just the greedy manipulations of old man Caruthers...

Back to the Mystery Van kids!

[Nightshade]

I'd be more 'offput' if it went the other way... someone tells me we are playing Call Of Cthulhu but it turns out all the wierd stuff going on is just the greedy manipulations of old man Caruthers...

Back to the Mystery Van kids!

Well, either way is bad, honestly, because its too easy to make character creation decisions that are suddenly pretty much senseless; the fact that the actual genre/campaign isn't the one you wanted to play is another layer.

[Atgxtg]

While chatting with a coworker about games and BRP (he's a Call of Cthulhu player), we both lamented that it's impossible to "spring" the Mythos on a player as he (usually) knows what he's getting into.

It struck me that BRP allows a GM to do "the switch" (not in the Seinfeldian sense), starting with a generic system and players who may have no idea what's in store during the campaign.

So a normal world BRP game might suddenly veer into horror or science-fiction.

That's one of the big obstacles with all horror RPGs. Players have a sort of "shock absorber" by know what they are getting into, unlike the protagonists in 99% of horror stories. Instead of being surprised and scared, the players immediacy suspect supernatural involvement and go looking for it.

My most successful horror adventures were in campaigns that were not (supposedly) horror based. That "this isn't supposed to happen" feeling that goes along with that is perfect for setting the mood. THe old Juedges Guild "HEllpits of Nightfang" advenutre for RQ2 led to one of the best horror RPG scenes I've ever had. The PCs were holded up inside a building, and the Vampire was outside (I was running this before Cults of Terror, so I ran the Vamp with the traditional pwers and weaknesses rather than with teh Vivamort stuff). The Vamp couldn't enter the dwelling (wasn't invited, tradtional vamp weakness), and so had tried lthings like setting the building on fire and mesmersizing someone to get an invite. Standoff. THen the Vamp taunted one of the PCs ending the insults with "why do you come out here and face me light a man!"

THe PC replied "Oh yeah, well why don't YOU.....go away". We all got to see the player turn pale and his eyes open wide when he realized just how close he came to inviting the vamp inside.

The reverse holds true, too. My favorite CoC adventure was one where the GM threw us up against gangsters. We were all expecting Deep Ones and Mi-Go, and were surprised that we had to deal with something so mundane. They proved a tough foe, too, since most of the Mythos creatures don't call you up on the phone to set you up for a drive by shooting, or bribe the cops. Plus, you can get the chair for killing a gangster.

It the unexpected that makes horror work, and sadly, is why horror RPGs generally are not very scary.

[Atgxtg]

The trouble here is that everyone is discussing what they think will be in the D100 rules, or what was in RQ or Magic World or some other system, rather than what's going to be in the rules.

Hopefully it will come out close enough to Christmas for me to use Christmas money, or close enough to my birthday for me to use Birthday money so we can discuss what's actually in it.

True, but considering that only a select few have seen the new BRP rules, it would be impossible for us to do otherwise. That why we have this Q&A thread and are pestering Jason.

It also why no one is jumping in to write a supplement for BRP yet.

It's like a new movie, where we've seen the original, but don't know what will be changed in the remake. (Not the best analogy, since remakes are rarely up to par with the original, and we have higher hopes than that for BRP).

[Sorloc]

For my 2 cents on which magic system for BRP. Although I plan on using The spirit /divine spells from Runequest and Sandy Petersen's sorcery system , I will look at other systems as they come out. I dont mind different sorcery systems as I have always felt there should be different schools of sorcery out there. I Just want to see a sorcery system that is balanced so the non magic specialist dont wind up as a cheering gallery for the finger waggers . If the System is such that a experienced Mage type can easy defeat 3 experienced non mage types and not work up a sweat I probably wont like it.

And I want exactly the opposite.

I have always cast my vote with the systems that don't create some arbitrary 'balancing' factor against spellcasters, such as Ars Magica and RuneQuest.

The same would go for psionicists and supers as well.

Those who have powers (magic, telepathy, mutant abilities, etc.) are simply superior to Mundanes.

Creating an artificial system to handicap those characters (higher skill costs, restricted equipment, having to wear a pointy hat) is simply asinine. There is never any good reasoning behind it besides "we have to do this so that the player who chooses to play a fighter won't feel bad because the mage has more powers."

Tough.

Shouldn't play a straight fighter then.

I never saw any problems with magic vs nonmagic in RuneQuest, wether I was playing a sorcerer, a priest, or just a guy with a few battle magic spells. You do what you do. If you don't like playing that character, then play a different one, not take power away from someone else.

As for armor, all armor restrictions are simply artificial attempts to handicap a spellcaster. You can justify it any way you want, but that's still all it is.

Same goes for Supers, but you don't lend any credence to the player who is playing a normal and is complaining that the mutants have too much power - they shouldn't be able to use certain equipment, like airplanes or armor, because they have superpowers.

Why listen to the same argument when it concerns spellcasters / telepaths?

In a point-based system, the point is moot - you get what you pay for.

In most other systems, you must pay DP or XP for both the spells and the ability to cast them, and sometimes even the ability to modify and target them. Paying the DP there lessens the DP you have available for other things, like weapon skills and riding skill and such, but many systems (and GMs) aren't satistfied with that, and increase the DP costs for those skills for spellcasters as well, virtually guaranteeing that spellcasters won't ever be good at combat as well.

As Denny Crane would say, "Namby-Pamby."

[Nightshade]

Creating an artificial system to handicap those characters (higher skill costs, restricted equipment, having to wear a pointy hat) is simply asinine. There is never any good reasoning behind it besides "we have to do this so that the player who chooses to play a fighter won't feel bad because the mage has more powers."

To be blunt, this is nonsense. There can be all kinds of setting based reasons. If you have rare mages in the setting, and magic is that attractive, why would it be rare? Its fine to have it be common if you have a setting like Glorantha where magic is assumed to be epidemic, but if you want an uncommon or rare magic setting (where its only the purview of specialists), one way or another, to not have the system show a reason for that makes for an irrational setting. Either its hard to learn, has limited availability (and this has to be enforceable in some way) or has side costs few want to deal with.

[RMS]

To be blunt, this is nonsense. There can be all kinds of setting based reasons. If you have rare mages in the setting, and magic is that attractive, why would it be rare? Its fine to have it be common if you have a setting like Glorantha where magic is assumed to be epidemic, but if you want an uncommon or rare magic setting (where its only the purview of specialists), one way or another, to not have the system show a reason for that makes for an irrational setting. Either its hard to learn, has limited availability (and this has to be enforceable in some way) or has side costs few want to deal with.

I can't see any way that isn't clunky to support the first two in the mechanics though. Hard to learn could lead to different types of skills, something that's never been in BRP and I'd rather we didn't add. (I can see the argument for easy vs. hard skills, but don't want to deal with the added complexity myself.) Limited availability is perfectly reasonable within a given world, but that's strictly a gameworld decision and should not be tied into the rules in any way IMO. Plus, I don't have any problem with mages being very rare in the world, while being quite common amongst the PCs.

The only tradeoffs I really don't mind are encumbrance and minimum INT/POW/CHA. There's plenty of presidence for magic being enhanced by being naked, or nearly naked, for that to make sense the encumbrance penalties to make sense. The minimum INT/POW/CHA stats have the advantage of clearly offering an ingame reason for magic to be rare, but have the disadvantages of feeling arbitrary: why should someone with POW 16 get magic, but someone with POW 15 not have it?

I do like the idea of making magic inherently dangerous. Make it so that anyone can dabble in it, but only those who are strong or foolish are willing to risk the consequences. Corum had a nice stab at doing this that read very nicely. I hear good things about the MRQ Elric/Stormbringer take on this, but have yet to read it.

[Jason D]

At this point, it might just be easier for me to answer questions in other threads.

This one has gotten overlong and too bogged down with arguments beyond the scope of its original intended purpose.

[RMS]

I'm sure I'm not that only one who doesn't pay attention to the specific thread title when replying, but just replies to a specific post or two...at least that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it!

[Nightshade]

At this point, it might just be easier for me to answer questions in other threads.

This one has gotten overlong and too bogged down with arguments beyond the scope of its original intended purpose.

I apologize for contributing to that, Jason, but the truth is, threads do spawn side discussion; I can't help but think this was to some extent, inevitable. Unless it was set up so that no one would respond to anyone but you (and how that would be enforced I can't imagine short of our boardmaster simply deleting all ones that did), it was just going to happen.

[Nightshade]

I can't see any way that isn't clunky to support the first two in the mechanics though. Hard to learn could lead to different types of skills, something that's never been in BRP and I'd rather we didn't add. (I can

I don't see any intrinsic problem with it myself.

see the argument for easy vs. hard skills, but don't want to deal with the added complexity myself.) Limited availability is perfectly reasonable within a given world, but that's strictly a gameworld decision and should not be tied into the rules in any way IMO. Plus, I don't have any problem with mages being very rare in the world, while being quite common amongst the PCs.

Any magic system makes gameworld assumptions; I don't see this as any worse than many others automatically built into a magic system.

The only tradeoffs I really don't mind are encumbrance and minimum INT/POW/CHA. There's plenty of presidence for magic being enhanced by being naked, or nearly naked, for that to make sense the encumbrance penalties to make sense. The minimum INT/POW/CHA stats have the advantage of clearly offering an ingame reason for magic to be rare, but have the disadvantages of feeling arbitrary: why should someone with POW 16 get magic, but someone with POW 15 not have it?

You can always make it so that those with lower values can use it, but at a penalty (perhaps a substantial one); that's the way some weapon attribute requirements work in some versions of BRP.

[Jason D]

I apologize for contributing to that, Jason, but the truth is, threads do spawn side discussion; I can't help but think this was to some extent, inevitable. Unless it was set up so that no one would respond to anyone but you (and how that would be enforced I can't imagine short of our boardmaster simply deleting all ones that did), it was just going to happen.

Oh, I'm not cranky or anything... it's just at 29 pages and counting, this thread has wandered so far over the place that it's not entirely useful as a resource any more.

I prefer more focused threads (with specific titles) that are easier for searching later, rather than having to remember that X was talked about on page 14 of a particular thread (whose title may not reflect the particular subject).

So, from now on I'll just duck out of this thread and answer questions in any new threads, as it'll be a much more useful resource in the future.

[Nightshade]

Oh, I'm not cranky or anything... it's just at 29 pages and counting, this thread has wandered so far over the place that it's not entirely useful as a resource any more.

I prefer more focused threads (with specific titles) that are easier for searching later, rather than having to remember that X was talked about on page 14 of a particular thread (whose title may not reflect the particular subject).

So, from now on I'll just duck out of this thread and answer questions in any new threads, as it'll be a much more useful resource in the future.

I can certainly see your point.

[Atgxtg]

Oh, I'm not cranky or anything... it's just at 29 pages and counting, this thread has wandered so far over the place that it's not entirely useful as a resource any more.

I prefer more focused threads (with specific titles) that are easier for searching later, rather than having to remember that X was talked about on page 14 of a particular thread (whose title may not reflect the particular subject).

So, from now on I'll just duck out of this thread and answer questions in any new threads, as it'll be a much more useful resource in the future.

Uh, Jason,

Not to start trouble, but you have sort of gone off on a few tangents yourself, and that sort of give tacit approval to everyone else going off topic.

For instance,

While chatting with a coworker about games and BRP (he's a Call of Cthulhu player), we both lamented that it's impossible to "spring" the Mythos on a player as he (usually) knows what he's getting into.

It struck me that BRP allows a GM to do "the switch" (not in the Seinfeldian sense), starting with a generic system and players who may have no idea what's in store during the campaign.

So a normal world BRP game might suddenly veer into horror or science-fiction.

is off topic and has nothing to do with BRP Q&A (it's a good topic for a new thread, though).

I humbly suggest that rather than ducking out from the Q&AA to lots of different threads, we all just keep this thread "locked" onto Q&A and anyone with side questions start new threads for THOSE.

How about you, and/or Triff, and/or an assigned moderated enforce a "stay on topic" rule for this particular thread., and post a "off topic/please start new thread" reminder when we begin to stray?

Otherwise the problem will just move with us, as we jump from thread to thread and topic to topic. Sorry, but that's what will happen.

[Trifletraxor]

Hi Jason!

Do you know if the new cover is finished? Have you had a chance to look at it?

SGL.

[Jason D]

Hi Jason!

Do you know if the new cover is finished? Have you had a chance to look at it?

Hey Trif!

Sadly, "no" and "no" are my answers.

But I'll keep folks posted as soon as I know, and I'm sure Chaosium will let me post something when it's done and final.

Thanks,

Jason

[The Last Conformist]

SAN = INT+POW (reasoning and will help resist insanity)

In some settings, perhaps. In Cthulhuverse, reasoning will only speed your descent! :eek:

While SAN is obviously an odd one out, it never struck me to regard the calculations of MP and HP as inconsistent. Both can be regarded as the (rounded) average of the relevant characteristics - it's just that for MP, there is only one relevant characteristic.

[The Last Conformist]

I've suggested before that the spirit, divine, and ritual magic from RQ; some de-Lovecraftized Call of Cthulhu magic; the Ki powers from Land of Ninja; more info on demon summoning from Stormbringer (4th edition); and some of the expanded magic from The Bronze Grimiore and The Unknown East would make a kick-ass BRP Magic.

I don't have SB4 - are the summoning rules similar to E!/SB5? I always liked the design-your-own-demon aspect.

Back to the actual BRP book, I understand there's a point buy option for chargen? Is it totally open à la GURPS (I think I'll lower my CON to buy more Persuade) or more structured à la, say, World of Darkness (X points for stats, Y points for skills, etc)?

[Jason D]

I don't have SB4 - are the summoning rules similar to E!/SB5? I always liked the design-your-own-demon aspect.

They're similar, not entirely compatible. The SB4 rules are essentially based on the old Superworld powers (or so the author Ben Monroe claims), while the Elric!/SB5 ones are more low-key.

Back to the actual BRP book, I understand there's a point buy option for chargen? Is it totally open à la GURPS (I think I'll lower my CON to buy more Persuade) or more structured à la, say, World of Darkness (X points for stats, Y points for skills, etc)?

The rules suggest four power levels - normal, heroic, epic, and superhuman.

You get X points to be divided amongst characteristics, and skills are handled through skill points. Each power level has a different point value.

There is no "turn in a characteristic for X skill points" or vice versa, though if you're using the super powers system, the Super Characteristics and Super Skills powers can be used for those aspects, and those points come out of the same bucket.

It's possible for the GM to decide to have PCs begin with heroic-level characteristics and superhuman-level skills, or any combination, based on the setting and desired style of gameplay.

[The Last Conformist]

Thanks.