How do you define BRP?

[badcat]

I am completely with you on your second and third points. SIZ is useful, in spite of those little aberrations from time to time, and indeed it is one of the things that sets BRP apart. I use it, I was just commenting on the less-than-great results I have gotten from time to time. It's easy to fix. MRQs combat system is several steps backwards, no way I would ever think of running it like it is. The only improvements the game introduced are the chargen and maybe the encumbrance system, for some of us. The rest of it? I can honestly say I have downloaded better BRP houserules free off the internet.

About the experience thing. When I use it (as I did mostly when I ran the game where I got it, Fifth Cycle) there are certain amounts of experience given for this or that. Like any other game that uses such a system. Usually between 10 and 40 points per session. The skills all have increasing costs per 'rank' (+5%), with eight ranks. Like broadsword costs 9/14/23/36/72 etc., with the cost modified by the skills' controlling stats (two each).
It works well for this particular game and would probably work for a regular BRP game just fine. Any one of the versions that use 5% increments, like RQ2. All the skills have their own progression tables. It is faster and easier than it looks, and when I did use it for one campaign, my BRP veteran players did not have a problem with it. It works OK in 'regular' BRP games, it's just different. Some of us liked it better, some didn't. The ones who liked it better said they had more control over how their character developed. Personally it just depends on what kind of game I am running. I guess I would rather have it as the exp. cost way if I were playing, myself. No accounting for taste.

[Sorloc]

Originally Posted by badcat

It is interesting to me that several of you put emphasis on the experience check system. In my homebrew I did away with that and used an 'increase for experience point cost' system like Fifth Cycle. The SIZ stat has always been a sort of mixed blessing to me, as well. Unless there is some houserule to control it (like the use of a default value) it can result in very strange characters from time to time. Midget warriors, Herculean wizards, etc.

BRP:
¤ d100
¤ SIZ stat (that integrates with armor, encumberance, damage, knockback...)
¤ experience check system
¤ forces roleplaying to develop characters
¤ hit points based on stats, no power creep
¤ armor absorbs damage
¤ shields are weapons too - parry with anything
¤ no levels
¤ no classes
¤ impales, knockback, attacking a weapon, long reach weapons, area effect weapons and attacks, Strike Ranks, in & out damage, lots of small wounds can take you out, the whole combat system is the best I've ever used.

RE: above:
What's wrong with midget warriors? Do midget societies have to hire warriors from other races? What's wrong with big wizards? The growth gland impedes magic or something?

As to the experience system, There is already a system in place to gain skills you did not use recently. It's called roleplaying. What you do is this: IN CHARACTER, you look for someone who can teach the skill or spell you want to learn or improve. You convince them to teach you. You train with your teacher for a certain amount of time (yes, IN-GAME), and then, >pouf< you now have some more ability in that skill.

I'm sorry if I sound nasty, please assume I used whatever combination of smileys are necessary for you to accept that I'm not trying to belittle or degrade you personally, it's just that I have heard this a lot, and I don't get it. I actually have instituted RQ3 experience into my Rolemaster game - you can't put points into swimming if you've never learned (you don't just suddenly know how to swim just because you killed a beholder), nor can you gain ANY spell, *without a teacher*.

[badcat]

Don't be so serious. As I pointed out above, these are very minor things to me. BRP is my game. Sometimes I see things from other games I like to try out; dont you?

There is no reason the experience system I described won't work alongside 'role-playing' and/or BRP specifically. I know, because I used it once or twice and there was no collateral damage and the players thought it was fine. No substantive difference, no substantive improvement either.

You don't sound particularly nasty, in fact I smiled because you are kind of preaching to the choir. I was commenting that I never particularly considered the experience system or SIZ to be defining elements of BRP (and so was a little surprised many of the rest of you do), and that I have run successful houseruled games without one or both. Don't worry about it.

Besides, there was more to it than I described. Eight 5% ranks make 40%(where is the rest of the skill % to make it viable?), so the system as a whole is basically BRP, but with some twists...some twists that make it fun in its own right. Even though I remain convinced the game started out as RQ2. It is certainly as much fun.

And the SIZ thing. I usually just assign modifiers per race in the game. It's funny what ranges you can come up with if you use straight 3D6 rolls, is all. Some days my dice just don't cooperate. And my favorite BRP rpg, Stormbringer, was definitely wildly unbalanced in more ways than that. Where else could you roll up a midget beggar with 18 STR and no arms, anyway?

[Enpeze]

Originally Posted by Sorloc

I actually have instituted RQ3 experience into my Rolemaster game - you can't put points into swimming if you've never learned (you don't just suddenly know how to swim just because you killed a beholder), nor can you gain ANY spell, *without a teacher*.

yepp. The key in a rpg should be authenticity. I dont like the experience approach of most other rpg systems and therefore I never fully understood the philosophy behind XP. BRP feels extremely organic in its rules for experience. There are just 2 ways to gain more and better skills. Learning and practicicing. Of course its also what certain players would call "imbalanced", because one player if lucky can gain more skill than another, but that feels very realistic and like life itsself.

[badcat]

That's a whole other argument. Experience systems can be quite 'organic' feeling as long as they are relatively open ended. The experience system in BRP can be changed with no harm to the game play, therefore it is not a defining facet of the system. IMO.

[Trifletraxor]

Originally Posted by badcat

That's a whole other argument. Experience systems can be quite 'organic' feeling as long as they are relatively open ended. The experience system in BRP can be changed with no harm to the game play, therefore it is not a defining facet of the system. IMO.

But do you limit experience gains to skills that have actually been used during play, or some other reason can be given to why they've increased?

To me the tick-system is also part of what defines BRP to me, but that's not to say other systems won't work too.

(I once played AD&D (I was desperate), and played a dwarf noble travelling with a party through a dessert. I mostly sat in my wagon and drank. At the end of the journey he became a skilled swimmer... And none of the other players found that strange at all! )

Sverre.

[golden wheel dancer]

The BRP exp system, in which a character learns from experience rather than as a result of player whim, is a defining feature of BRPs realism for me. The fact that it can be dropped without affecting the system is another defining feature of BRP: the system is rock solid so it can be battered with house rules and hold itself together.

[badcat]

Yes, when I used the experience system from Fifth Cycle I had the players note what they were 'working on' on the character sheet and describe when and how. No biggie.

And I agree that the ability to change the experience system and other parts of the game system without breaking it is one of the defining aspects, probably more so than the check system itself...but I usually use the check system myself. I have run many BRP games and only used the Fifth Cycle system once.

[Atgxtg]

badcat,
Put me down for another who considers the "check to improve" XP system a core part of RQ/BRP.

Firth Cycles XP system is, IMO more along the lines of DragonQuest than RuneQuest.

One thing that made RQ easier to run, and went over well with the D&D players was how fast/easy it was to handle experience. Rather than spending time adding up and dividing XP, things only took a couple of minutes to roll over some skills. Plus the gradual improvement gave a strong feeling of character growth. Experience ends up being a byproduct of adventuring or the goal of actual study, rather than a reward for spending time at the table or killing monsters.

[badcat]

That's OK. I seem to be outvoted on that one for sure.