How Complete is BRP?

[Michael Hopcroft]

I'm wondering just how much of the BRP BGB rules are covered in the ruleset -- and how well that coverage works with version 3. Are there any features of the game that won't be handled properly -- mainly subsystems that are rarely used like Superpowers.

If BRP is a Version 1 ruleset, I wonder if it will even work at all.

[Moon Wizard]

I'm not familiar with BRP myself; but it looks like the ruleset currently in the store was built in 2010 time frame. So, I'm guessing that it supports the core character/NPC sheet rules from the version available at that time. Someone who uses or has worked on the BRP ruleset may be able to provide more info.

Regards,
JPG

[Blackfoot]

The Ruleset in the store is a great start.. but it does lack several of the features now found in FG, in addition to some basic BRP functionality. It needs some updating but can still be used for a great game.

[Michael Hopcroft]

I imagine updating the BRP ruleset is not as a high a priority as -- well, as most other priorities for revisions for 3.0. I'm not sure it's even used all that often by GMs.

That said, I did buy a copy, as well as a copy of the M&M kit. Maybe I will get to do something with it.

With Call of Cthulhu going to percentile attributes in 7th Edition....

[Michael Hopcroft]

It just do happens that my collection of D100 games has grown by leaps and bounds. The current Bundle of Holding includes Clockwork & Chivalry, an OpenQuest Engine game about al alternative version of the English Civil War (from Britain), and that also inspired me to pick up the same publisher's core set Renaissance, both in PDF. Then I get a call from a local store saying they have my copy of Runequest 6 and can I please pick it up sometime in the next week?

This must pose a dilemma for SmiteWorks if they even have it in mind. All these games are, as far as core systems are concerned, BRP with the serial numbers filed off. They are also built around the BRP-based content that Mongoose put into Open Content with their first Runequest game. But because they license BRP from Chaosium, I imagine they can't permit someone to update it on their own to make it compatible with 3.0 and/or the MRQ-based games. Chaosium could, I suppose, open it up somewhat if they go into the process of having the ruleset revised for 3.0, but is it used or profitable enough to be worth their trouble?

[Michael Hopcroft]

I just re-read my last post, several days after the fact/ Oy, I must have been tired when I wrote that. It's barely coherent!

Let me find a different way to phrase it -- what would be required, from a user standpoint, to make the BRP set support a game like Clockwork & Chivalry or Runequest 6?

[Valarian]

The BRP ruleset works in the current version. It's not got all the automated features of 4e & 3.5e - but is that necessary? I think the library modules could be laid out better. For other games, you can create a game extension using the in-built game system customisation. I've done some of this for a Star Trek customised BRP based on FASA's Star Trek Roleplaying Game.

[RosenMcStern]

Let me find a different way to phrase it -- what would be required, from a user standpoint, to make the BRP set support a game like Clockwork & Chivalry or Runequest 6?

I think the [sad] answer is: to wait until the ruleset is upgraded to the new CoreRPG foundation. This will make things easier for modders. Much easier.

[Valarian]

The game options for BRP can be tailored fairly easily with the current ruleset. This includes skills, include sanity as a hit point counter, the attribute names. I've recently got the Clockwork & Chivalry game, so I'll see if I can have a look at the differences. If someone's familiar with the OpenQuest differences to standard BRP and can summarise, that would be useful.

There's sample customisation extension files in the BRP ruleset folder.

[chillybilly]

Any idea when/if this ruleset will be upgraded? With the combat tracker not working, it's a waste of $28. This is the first purchase I've made with FG that has me pretty unhappy. I'm not sure why they are charging money for it doesn't really work and there's no support.

I've actually got better support from people on some free extensions than this set I paid money for.