Fate of BRP

[Atgxtg]

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

As a legal matter, that is likely not actually right, and a lot of commonly assumed practices probably would not hold up to a legal challenge. However, the stakes are usually too low to afford the expenses involved. 

Back when MRQ came out it was explained to everybody that you can't copy write how you roll dice and play a game. Only the actual text and any name branding. Hence the reason why Mongoose was able to print a game called RuneQuest back then but Chaosium couldn't. And why those game system can continue to exist under different names later on when the license for the  RQ brand name expires. 

 

Now while someone could challenge that (or pretty much anything else) in court the rewards are so small that by the time the matter was settled probably neither party would make any profit off of the game. WotC and D&D might be about the only RPG that might be big enough for such action to be viable, and OGL kinda eliminated any reason for somebody to bother ripping off D&D, since they can just do an OGL version and avoid any problems. 

[g33k]

59 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Copyright doesn't protect ideas or method of playing it. But it is an open question what that means in the context of an RPG rules system. 

Hmmm.  And "hmmm" again.  That's a fascinating perspective.  The specific language "Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device..." has a certain prima facie meaning that would SEEM to legitimize a blatant rip-off.  But of course one can claim that either (or both of) the quoted reg and/or the RPG usage of "system" is a so-called "Term of Art" and has a specific meaning not covered by the lay/convential/prima-facie meaning.

And (some) lawyers just LOVE to delve into that sort of thing as obsessively as any gamer-geek ...

So I guess you are correct.  Since it hasn't actually GONE to court (afaik?), we don't actually know how the lawyers would argue, and the courts would interpret, these issues.

[Atgxtg]

5 hours ago, Jeff said:

Here's the thing - rules without a setting that supports the rules (plus a flow of material to support gaming in that setting) don't sell nearly as well as supported settings. And there's no reason to import Glorantha's magic system to fantasy Earth (for example) or to an occult conspiracy game.  Elements of RuneQuest's combat are simply irrelevant in a game where firearms are the primary combat weapon. In our opinion, rules should be tailored to the setting - and the setting should be supported with background, scenarios, and the like.

Sure, that's been Chaosium's approach since Stormbringer. Adapt the rules to the setting . About the only point of contention I have is that RQ is a game that uses the BRP engine. It isn't. Or at least in the case of RQ, RQ2, RQ3 and Strombringer it wasn't. BRP was a derivative of RuneQuest, as was Stormbringer. It was only later on, with WoW and CoC did we see RPGs built around the "BRP engine". 

[RosenMcStern]

http://www.strebecklaw.com/court-rules-favor-cloned-tabletop-game-no-protection-us-copyright-law/

And just to be clear: I am in no way endorsing game plagiarism like it happened for "Bang!". It is just that a court ruling (precedent) now exists. And it is in favour of "no copyright for rules".

 

Edited April 19, 2017 by RosenMcStern
Clarification

[g33k]

2 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Sure, that's been Chaosium's approach since Stormbringer. Adapt the rules to the setting . About the only point of contention I have is that RQ is a game that uses the BRP engine. It isn't. Or at least in the case of RQ, RQ2, RQ3 and Strombringer it wasn't. BRP was a derivative of RuneQuest, as was Stormbringer. It was only later on, with WoW and CoC did we see RPGs built around the "BRP engine". 

egads, man!   Do the chicken and the egg next!!!  

[g33k]

16 minutes ago, RosenMcStern said:

http://www.strebecklaw.com/court-rules-favor-cloned-tabletop-game-no-protection-us-copyright-law/

Fascinating.  Not an RPG, of course (and the author mentions Legend of Zelda as likely protect'able in some ways, due to story elements).

And now SFWA admits gaming authors.

So I'm betting that this is ripe for further legal exploration (if there was more money in it).

 

[Chaot]

34 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

It isn't. Or at least in the case of RQ, RQ2, RQ3 and Strombringer it wasn't. BRP was a derivative of RuneQuest, as was Stormbringer. It was only later on, with WoW and CoC did we see RPGs built around the "BRP engine". 

Same difference. It's semantics. RuneQuest was around before the term BRP but BRP describes RuneQuest. I think I have this discussion once every five years or so. One of my favorites.

Edited April 19, 2017 by Chaot

[soltakss]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Sure, that's been Chaosium's approach since Stormbringer. Adapt the rules to the setting . About the only point of contention I have is that RQ is a game that uses the BRP engine. It isn't. Or at least in the case of RQ, RQ2, RQ3 and Strombringer it wasn't. BRP was a derivative of RuneQuest, as was Stormbringer. It was only later on, with WoW and CoC did we see RPGs built around the "BRP engine". 

Sometimes it needs repeating - RQ came first, then BRP was derived from RQ, then they mixed and intertwined in many ways.

[Atgxtg]

19 hours ago, g33k said:

egads, man!   Do the chicken and the egg next!!!  

Egg was first. 

[Atgxtg]

17 hours ago, soltakss said:

Sometimes it needs repeating - RQ came first, then BRP was derived from RQ, then they mixed and intertwined in many ways.

Yes. Exactly. 

 

18 hours ago, Chaot said:

Same difference. It's semantics. RuneQuest was around before the term BRP but BRP describes RuneQuest. I think I have this discussion once every five years or so. One of my favorites.

No, it's more than semantics, since both terms are used as titles for RPGs. If you order RQ or BRP from a store, drivethru, etc. you are going to get two differernt (but related RPGs). That is unless you are talking about RQ3 and that BRP monograph that actually was RQ3 without the copy writable stuff.

[Atgxtg]

On 4/19/2017 at 3:24 PM, RosenMcStern said:

http://www.strebecklaw.com/court-rules-favor-cloned-tabletop-game-no-protection-us-copyright-law/

And just to be clear: I am in no way endorsing game plagiarism like it happened for "Bang!". It is just that a court ruling (precedent) now exists. And it is in favour of "no copyright for rules".

 

Yeah, it might be legal, but that doesn't make it "right". A lot of us went down this road back with MRQ came out, and we realized just how little of the BRP/RQ game mechanics are actually protected. Abd it's also how and why the various BRP/RQ variants can and do exist.  I suspect that it will be a software RPG that finally gets things all hashed out, since that is where the money is, and pencil & paper RPGs will just be swept up in the ruling. 

 

I'm a bit mixed on the subject. While I don't condone ripping another RPG off, there are a lot of time when a new party puts out a really good product that is partially based on something else. Going back a few years, Judges Guild did a lot of "D&D compatible" stuff that was very good. 

 

Edited April 20, 2017 by Atgxtg

[Chaot]

7 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

No, it's more than semantics, since both terms are used as titles for RPGs. If you order RQ or BRP from a store, drivethru, etc. you are going to get two differernt (but related RPGs). That is unless you are talking about RQ3 and that BRP monograph that actually was RQ3 without the copy writable stuff.

Still Semantics. I can order Magic World and I can order Call of Cthulhu and I can order The Green and I can order Rubble and Ruin and I can order Open Quest and I can order RuneQuest and I'm still buying a variant on the same game. Luckily, we have a term that encapsulates all of those. That term is BRP.

A prime example of this is the BGB itself. It embraces all of these variants and says "Hey, everyone! Look at all this cool stuff. It's the same game. You just have to make of it what you want."

So, while trademark/copyright RuneQuest is not trademark/copyright BRP it is still directly related, when the dice hit the table it means exactly the same thing. But like I said, I've no skin in actually convincing you. This conversation is cyclical. I just have to take comfort in the fact that, someplace in the cosmic scheme of things I am correct! Despite our differences, I still love you Atgxtg.

 

[jagerfury]

I have more BRP books on my shelf than any other game. Different flavors for sure, but the BGB BRP system is the system I use when I'm creating my own homebrew campaign. I can rely on it to fit into the flavor I try to derive. No other system hits the mark every time. The systems strength is in the universal tool kit capabilities.

[g33k]

3 hours ago, Chaot said:

So, while trademark/copyright RuneQuest is not trademark/copyright BRP it is still directly related, when the dice hit the table it means exactly the same thing. 

Well... no.  

At least, no more than cheeseburger & beef stroganoff are "exactly the same thing" even though both are beef+dairy with sauce, over wheat-product.

Besides, who ever saw a cute kitten doing "I can haz beef stroganoff"???

But I agree with the spirit if not the letter of your point -- BRP is an amazingly-good system, and all flavors of it are the stronger for being so recognizable and BGB-style interchangeable.,

Edited April 21, 2017 by g33k

[Chaot]

I'm not sure how you can say that sitting down to play the Basic Role Playing System is different then sitting down to play Runequest. It's like arguing the difference between lions and tigers. They are both Panthera. Doesn't matter if we named lions first or tigers first. On a fundamental level RuneQuest and Elf Quest and OpenQuest are BRP.

[Jeff]

2 hours ago, Chaot said:

I'm not sure how you can say that sitting down to play the Basic Role Playing System is different then sitting down to play Runequest. It's like arguing the difference between lions and tigers. They are both Panthera. Doesn't matter if we named lions first or tigers first. On a fundamental level RuneQuest and Elf Quest and OpenQuest are BRP.

For what it is worth, that's how most of Team Chaosium sees it as well. BRP is the genus that ties together RQ, Call of Cthulhu, Ringworld, Elric, etc. 

[g33k]

2 hours ago, Chaot said:

I'm not sure how you can say that sitting down to play the Basic Role Playing System is different then sitting down to play Runequest.

Because RQ is the Glorantha-flavored variant of BRP.  It has magic, and Bronze(ish)-Age tech (mostly) and above all it has Runes and their metaphysical impact... Glorantha is made of myth.  Games like CoC &such-like... they have a more physics-y "real-world" vibe to them.  The supernatural elements are present, but feel alien and unnatural.

Sure, the mechanics are 95% identical... but they don't play the same!

"I draw my sword and leap forth to meet the slavering 12-foot-tall Chaos Demon!"   Storm Bull heroics (with a decent chance of survival)... or suicide for  a Mythos Investigator?   I reiterate:  they don't play the same!

And that's a GOOD thing!   Vive la difference!

 

2 hours ago, Chaot said:

It's like arguing the difference between lions and tigers. They are both Panthera. Doesn't matter if we named lions first or tigers first.

Ummm...  And Jaguars.  And Leopards.  There really ARE differences... even if they all are Panthera.  

 

3 hours ago, Chaot said:

On a fundamental level RuneQuest and Elf Quest and OpenQuest are BRP.

Of course they are!  And if I said anything to the contrary, then I badly misspoketyped.

 

 

[Atgxtg]

12 hours ago, Chaot said:

I'm not sure how you can say that sitting down to play the Basic Role Playing System is different then sitting down to play Runequest. It's like arguing the difference between lions and tigers. They are both Panthera. Doesn't matter if we named lions first or tigers first. On a fundamental level RuneQuest and Elf Quest and OpenQuest are BRP.

Because Lions aren't Tigers., and RQ doesn't play the same way a CoC. I should know, I'm the guy who successfully Sever Spirited Cthulhu out of an RQ/CoC crossover game! Combat in old Stormbringer played very differently than combat in RQ2. The differences in the frequency of criticals, specials (non-existent in Strombringer), hit locations as opposed to general hit points, major woulds, variable armor vs. fixed, skills over 100% vs. capped at 100%, ripostes, all make gameplay very different. 

 

It like saying Mushu Pork is the same as Barbecued Baby Back Ribs. The might both originate from the same animal, but they aren't the same dish. 

[Baragei]

Guys, reading the last few post I really don't understand what you're arguing about here.  

Everything originated from the same metaphorical animal - which was RuneQuest. Think of it as the original wolf dogs evolved and bred from. Now we have lots of dogs - some are small, some are big, some herd sheep and some drink out of the toilet. But they're all dogs. 

I think I read this in CoC; "This game doesn't have a lot of rules. This means that you don't need to spend a lot of time learning rules, and you'll be an expert in no time." (or something like that). They didn't say that I'd be well on my way to being an expert in a whole lot of other games as well! 

[Aycorn]

2 hours ago, Baragei said:

Guys, reading the last few post I really don't understand what you're arguing about here.  

Everything originated from the same metaphorical animal - which was RuneQuest. Think of it as the original wolf dogs evolved and bred from. Now we have lots of dogs - some are small, some are big, some herd sheep and some drink out of the toilet. But they're all dogs. 

I think I read this in CoC; "This game doesn't have a lot of rules. This means that you don't need to spend a lot of time learning rules, and you'll be an expert in no time." (or something like that). They didn't say that I'd be well on my way to being an expert in a whole lot of other games as well! 

I agree with you, but if I've learned anything from RPG forums, it's that many people see enormous differences where I see inconsequential ones.

And they seem to outnumber me 

I don't say they're wrong.  Maybe it's just like a conversation I once heard at a party in the late 80's/early 90's.  Several people commented on Sinead O'Connor's then-new recording of "Nothing Compares 2 U", and how beautiful her singing was.  And one fellow piped up with "No no no  - she goes flat on a couple notes."

Guess it just depends on where your attention is focused.

[Atgxtg]

On 4/21/2017 at 11:03 AM, Baragei said:

Guys, reading the last few post I really don't understand what you're arguing about here.  

We're not arguing. It all has to do with the question about the "Fate of BRP". 

I thought the question posted was bout the "Big Gold Book" RPG and what will happen to it in the future and if there will be any more supplements for it  once the new RuneQuest comes out. Now some people say that it'a all the same, but I don;t think that what the original question was about> Obviously. there is going to be a new RQ, and we can safely assume that the original poster is aware of this. So I think he was curious as to the state of the BGB and if that product line would still be supported.

[Michael Hopcroft]

On 4/19/2017 at 0:15 PM, Atgxtg said:

Back when MRQ came out it was explained to everybody that you can't copy write how you roll dice and play a game. Only the actual text and any name branding. Hence the reason why Mongoose was able to print a game called RuneQuest back then but Chaosium couldn't. And why those game system can continue to exist under different names later on when the license for the  RQ brand name expires. 

 

Now while someone could challenge that (or pretty much anything else) in court the rewards are so small that by the time the matter was settled probably neither party would make any profit off of the game. WotC and D&D might be about the only RPG that might be big enough for such action to be viable, and OGL kinda eliminated any reason for somebody to bother ripping off D&D, since they can just do an OGL version and avoid any problems. 

2

If anything defines the Law of Unintended Consequences in the game industry, it's the OGL. The original intent was to make writing for D&D so easy and profitable that people would abandon making their own systems. The result was not what Wizards intended. Which is why it surprised me when MRQ came out with an Open License,

As far as the future of the BGB, opening some more of the system to third parties would enable publishers so inclined to do things with it that they currently can;t do in the open version fo D100. On the other hand, newly-invented subsystems are possible for D100 with proper playtesting, which is why the niche market for this system is gaining ever more games with unique features. The principal advantage Chaosium will have with Runequest is that it is a highly recognizable name with a great history. The question is what about that history will matter to the next generation of RPG players.

In other situations, of course, that can be a curse -- the fourth edition of D&D would have been hailed as an exciting and groundbreaking design had it been released under any other name.

[Atgxtg]

21 hours ago, Michael Hopcroft said:

If anything defines the Law of Unintended Consequences in the game industry, it's the OGL. The original intent was to make writing for D&D so easy and profitable that people would abandon making their own systems. The result was not what Wizards intended. Which is why it surprised me when MRQ came out with an Open License,

Yes the original intent was  to revising a flagging RPG (D&D), and kill off a bunch of competing products by allowing third party companies to produce D&D products at only a modest fee.  Where it went wrong was that WotC thought that once D&D locked up the market they'd maintain control over D&D, and then just kill off the OGL with 4th edition. It backfired when 4E didn't go over so well with 3E players, and Panthfinder came out and continued developing the OGL format D&D.

I think MRQ went OGL because it came out before the 4E fiasco, and because Mongoose specializes in putting out a lot of product fast. They don't really care who control the development of the game as long as they can make money by producing lots of supplements. Had open MRQ took off, and a RQ equivalent of Pathfinder came out, then I suspect Mongoose would be content producing supplements for it. 

[p_clapham]

8 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Yes the original intent was  to revising a flagging RPG (D&D), and kill off a bunch of competing products by allowing third party companies to produce D&D products at only a modest fee.  Where it went wrong was that WotC thought that once D&D locked up the market they'd maintain control over D&D, and then just kill off the OGL with 4th edition. It backfired when 4E didn't go over so well with 3E players, and Panthfinder came out and continued developing the OGL format D&D.

I think MRQ went OGL because it came out before the 4E fiasco, and because Mongoose specializes in putting out a lot of product fast. They don't really care who control the development of the game as long as they can make money by producing lots of supplements. Had open MRQ took off, and a RQ equivalent of Pathfinder came out, then I suspect Mongoose would be content producing supplements for it. 

Atgxtg,

You wouldn't happen to have a source on the OGL being a Trojan horse? I am doing a school project on the OGL and digitized games, and would like to include that perspective.

[g33k]

Just hadda pop back in and ask... 

am I the only one who originally hit this thread wondering if it was going to be some semi-crazed mashup of the "Fate" game mechanics with BRP???