Kurt Wiegel reviews BRP on Yoy Tube

[Solardog]

Here is a review on Basic Roleplaying by Chaosium Inc done by Kurt Wiegel.

YouTube - pugknowspro's Channel

Edited October 30, 2008 by Solardog
typo

[sdavies2720]

First link didn't work for me, but the second is good. Nice positive and informative review.

[Jason D]

Nice to see that!

[Harshax]

Kurt is always so excited to review games, but he actually managed to still be gushing about his love for BRP. :cool:

[Jason D]

I did think it was kind of funny seeing BRP criticized for being "dated" in a time when every week sees the release of some copyware version of original blue box D&D.

Also, I didn't really follow his logic with stating that it's dated in that it lacks advantages/disads, which most modern games have, but then he later goes on to say why they wouldn't be ideal for BRP.

[AikiGhost]

I did think it was kind of funny seeing BRP criticized for being "dated" in a time when every week sees the release of some copyware version of original blue box D&D.

Also, I didn't really follow his logic with stating that it's dated in that it lacks advantages/disads, which most modern games have, but then he later goes on to say why they wouldn't be ideal for BRP.

I think it's because hes trying to point out that what many new gamers see as a bug is actually a feature. Personally I have no problems with Adds/disads in BRP but when I said perhaps the new BRP core book should have them as an option I was shouted down.

[fmitchell]

Personally I have no problems with Adds/disads in BRP but when I said perhaps the new BRP core book should have them as an option I was shouted down.

One thing about advantages and disadvantages is that they're yet more tweaks and special cases. I'm OK with GURPS but the plethora of advantages/disadvantages gets overwhelming. Feats and especially Powers in D&D are "exception-based" rules run amok. Even Stunts in Spirit of the Century get a little confusing at times; a former character had Inner Strength, and I kept having to look up exactly what that meant.

There's something refreshing about having the exact number you need to roll for any situation on a one-page character sheet.

[Harshax]

I think it's because hes trying to point out that what many new gamers see as a bug is actually a feature.

That's how I read it too. He's a critic, and had he not been critical of one element of BRP, he wouldn't have been doing his job. In truth, BRP is dated for lacking an advantage/disadvantage system, because such things are in most new RPG's.

If you saw a new release of classic OD&D (of which there is one), it would be considered dated for lacking a skill system, but it would still be a great thing to see in professional print.

Kurt is right too, in that such a system would detract from the elegant mechanics of BRP.

Bottom line. He absolutely raved about BRP. Good job Jason!

[Jason D]

In truth, BRP is dated for lacking an advantage/disadvantage system, because such things are in most new RPG's.

Just as a point of reference, the first advantage/disadvantage system I can think of showed up in Champions, 27 years ago.

One might argue that ads/disads are also quite dated.

[Atgxtg]

Just as a point of reference, the first advantage/disadvantage system I can think of showed up in Champions, 27 years ago.

One might argue that ads/disads are also quite dated.

ANd BRP did have ads/disads with both version of Superworld, about 26 years ago. So BRP was right there in the beginning--just not to the same scale

Technically, I suppose those tables in games like Arduin or C&S were probably the first ads/disas system.

It wouldn't be too hard for someone to dust off the old Superworld rules and adapt them into a full fledged ads/disads system.

[Enpeze]

Great review, Kurt Weigel. Every point is so true. BRP is a great game but would need some modernization. So introducing a (optional and random?) ad/disad system would not be a failure in a future BRP version. Additionally I would also recommend more options for those who like to incorportate miniatures into their BRP games.

Interesting is that he likes the same 3 roleplaying rulesystems as I do. He is definately a man of taste.

-BRP

-Unisystem

-Savage worlds

[Harshax]

Interesting is that he likes the same 3 roleplaying rulesystems as I do. He is definately a man of taste.

-BRP

-Unisystem

-Savage worlds

Makes me want to try Unisystem. BRP and SW are my top two.

[Solardog]

Hello!

Has over 2500 views.

[RosenMcStern]

Well, it surely has disadvantages: fail a SAN roll and your character becomes affected by all kind of nasty phobias >:->

[frogspawner]

But he was so enthusiastic about it, I'll forgive him. The Adv/Dis point is so trivial (and isn't there one in the Supers section, anyway?), it makes me wonder if he's doing the opposite of 'damning with faint praise'.

(Who is this guy, though? Is he famous/influential, or just opinionated...)

[Dredj]

There was a thread awhile back that was about advantages/disadvantages for BRP. I personally don't see the draw to them. In fact, one of the big things that drew me to BRP was that it doesn't have them! As far as I'm concerned, it's just another way to pidgeonhole a player character. And I've never seen anyone play a character that was so perfect (regardless of the character's stats) that disadvantages would have to be set in stone. In fact, the more perfect the character's stats were, the more of an A-hole the character was played (but that could just be the groups I played in.

They work for some games (some games make them a necessary component), but BRP isn't one of them. Nor do I see them in any way as a hallmark of modernity. As far as I'm concerned, it all could just be a role-playing fad. (Maybe "fad" is a little too strong, as some of the systems that have ad/disad will stand the test of time, but anyone reading will probably get my point).

Edited December 2, 2008 by Dredj

[Dredj]

I was just looking at the review for the Battlestar Galactica game on rpg.net RPGnet : Review of Battlestar Galactica RPG . It turns out someone else doesn't like ad/disad rules, either; and covered the main reason I personally don't like them:

"Too often in ad/disad systems, you can get away with taking something like "mildly unpleasant body odor" and get the advantage "expert sniper" in exchange. That always seems a tad… unbalanced… to me, like a min-maxer's heyday."

[Aycorn]

PS - sorry if I sound like I'm blowing my stack. And no offense meant to anyone on the list - I'm just speaking in general.

[Nightshade]

Man, I know I'm getting in late on this, and I know I'm ranting, but ---

When the HELL did advantages/disadvantages become so $%$^(!! important, and when did they become the hallmark of "modernity" (or whatever), and where does this "dated" crap come from?

Some years ago, I had a discussion with someone over on Yog-Sothoth.com who was insisting that adding advantages/disadvantages would increase sales for COC.

I find it really hard to believe that potential buyers would suddenly scream "COC has advantages/disadvantages? Holy cow! I have to get a copy!!"

But maybe I'm wrong.

Sorry ... I just don't get it...

I suspect it depends in part on what people buying CoC are really using it for, but its hard to picture it making that much a difference.

As to the rest--the simple fact is that its a character definition tool. Most modern games are character build games--you don't roll your attributes, you distribute them. But attributes don't cover all the traits of character; some things are more limited than an attribute, some things simply you have or don't have. Once its desireable to represent those sorts of things (and it is for a lot, if not the majority of gamers) and you're using a build system, an advantage/disadvantage system is the logical follow through; in a way, any attribute system that has point allocation already is a crude advantage/disadvantage system; you're trading off the benefits of a high Strength for example for some disadvantage in another attribute area.

So I think that's the long and the short of it. There are other reasons (someone may want their character to have one eye, but not enough to deal with the problems therein without some form of payback in game terms, especially if you have a group that tends to view group capability as everyone's responsibility) but the extra capability for character definition is a big part of it.

(And for anyone who spouts, "Well real roleplayers don't need encouragement to have the above"...I'll just note that 90% of those so responding wouldn't give the beneficial parts (advantages) for free, so them whining about people expecting something for the disadvantages makes me roll my eyes).

[Jason D]

I was just looking at the review for the Battlestar Galactica game on rpg.net RPGnet : Review of Battlestar Galactica RPG . It turns out someone else doesn't like ad/disad rules, either; and covered the main reason I personally don't like them:

"Too often in ad/disad systems, you can get away with taking something like "mildly unpleasant body odor" and get the advantage "expert sniper" in exchange. That always seems a tad… unbalanced… to me, like a min-maxer's heyday."

I've actually run campaigns of BSG and Serenity, and have written for Margaret Weiss Productions on both game lines.

The statement above is a gross exaggeration. Ads/disads can be abused by min/maxers, but then most game systems can. Used rightly, they're awesome for adding unique aspects and quirks to characters.

They're not in the BRP core book for the following reasons:

a) BRP combat isn't as based on a hex map, which rules out "feat" style advantages.

Advantages or disads that affect skills just didn't make sense when comparing with the skill/experience system.

c) Aside from those in Superworld, they'd never been a part of BRP and we weren't out to reinvent the game.

d) A large part of the audience is people familiar with BRP games... I found few of the playtesters interested in such a system, and many were vociferously against them.

[Thalaba]

BRP does have Ads/Disads - they're called Chaos Features. My personal favourite is 'explodes on death' - nothing rallies your fellow party memebers around you like that!

T.

[badcat]

I prefer games without them, hence my liking for BRP and my strong negative reaction when anyone suggests they would improve a game that doesn't already use them.

D&D wasn't helped by them, for sure.

Some games with 'talents' or 'ads/disads' are great, though. I am particularly impressed with Savage Worlds (Solomon Kane, at least), WFRP2, and Ubiquity(HEX and Desolation). It's just that BRP works fine without them, thank you.

[vagabond]

In Stormbringer 1 - 4 , if you rolled up a beggar from Nadsokor, there

was a very interesting disadvantages table circa 1981.

-V

[Dredj]

The statement above is a gross exaggeration. Ads/disads can be abused by min/maxers, but then most game systems can. Used rightly, they're awesome for adding unique aspects and quirks to characters.

That was just one of the reasons I don't like them. Honestly, my first thought whenever I see a game system that has them is "how can I work the system so I don't have to deal with them?"

I agree they work for some systems, like PDQ. But, for the most part, I find them to be a hassle. And I disagree with the people who think that BRP should have them to be "modern".

[Aycorn]

I don't think there's anything wrong with ads/disads, per se. I don't think there's anything particularly right with them, either.

I confess to being prejudiced in the way I think about gaming. One of the arguments I was once confronted with as to why ads/disads were so important was "what if your player wants his character to have a friend in city hall? What rules do you have from preventing him from being able to get away with just anything because of that?" Well... I do think that a mature group of players ought to be able to deal with something like that, and work out the thing in a fair manner to which everyone agrees, without having to have a whole set of official rules on it. But then, I won't play with anything but a mature group of players.

My real gripe (even though I know the review was actually a positive one) is the use of the word "dated." To me, "dated" means something that had value (or was at least acceptable) in the past, but no longer does.

Knocking BRP for not having ads/disads is like saying "Casablanca" would be a great movie if it was only in color. Just ignorant, to me.

Anyway, I'm gettin' off my soapbox now.