Comparative Systemology

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

Two things I should clarify:

a) I am not a line editor at Chaosium, and at no point have I stated "this is the way it's gonna be" as regards to supplements. I spoke only about what I felt would work better, and what I plan on doing for my own Interplanetary book. If Charlie comes back and says "Hey, we really need to add all of the options into your manuscript" I will do so.

No problem Jason. I understand that sometimes you are speaking rules/BRP wise and sometimes you speaking as another gamer. That's cool. Maybe we should set up up with an "Jason the BRP author" account and "Jason, just another gamer" ID?


Just wondering how are you planning on handling options in Interplanetary? I would assume that certain options would be well suited towards the setting, and others not. Moist of the other multi-genre systems have some notes in settings book over what options are recommended. With BRP I could see some guidelines for which character generation method would be recommended, if EDU is recommended for that setting, and so forth.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

b) It's probably about the same amount of work to add optional stuff as to subtract it, and trying to go both direction makes for an extremely overcomplex NPC writeup. Some options aren't exactly compatible with one another, as well.

Not really. Consider what it takes to add hit locations in. First, the GM has to work them out, work out armor by piece (else all the NPCs are wearing complete suits all the time). Then the GM has to write that down. Since he can't just add it to the writeup in the book, he must either keep two sets of partial stats for each character and use both of them in the adventure, or copy all the stats out of the scenario and add the other stuff. That is really about the same work as building up all the NPCs from the ground up.

While I agree that not all the options will (nor should) be used at once. I think certain options will be more common with certain settings. Hit Locations would be more likely to be needed in a Roman campaign than, say the SAN or Superpower rules.

Likewise, adding things like all three AP values for armor isn't that tought, and more than one game with optional hit location and generic armor does just that. It not too hard to do "Armor-Plate 8 AP/1d10+2 or by location as follows:" with a hit location chart.

Otherwise, I don't think BRP is really supporting any of the options. Right now, anyone could adapt a CoC or SB5 adventure to RQ3. It's a lot of work, but it is possible. I think that things like hit locations being one of the more common options should be supported. If that is how BRP is going to write up the supplments then I don't think the sourcebooks will be of much use to those who use certain optinos any more that supplments for other games.

Going through you points:

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Hit Points Per Location in addition to general HP... not much conflict there

Since about 1/3rrd of the people here seem to use Hit Locations, I would say they are a must for most fantasy and historical settings.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Fatigue Points and Sanity... easy enough to add... this seems easy!

A must for horror supplments. ANd should be inclduing in such supplments. Probably;y not needed for other settings.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Armor per Hit Location is easy enough to add, but what if the GM wants random armor?

List both.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Heroic Hit Points doubles HP, and causes a double value if you want to have normal HP also represented

Drop this unless it is heavilty reccomeded by a particular setting. Doubling HP is easy to do in you head. Working up AP ratings and AP/HP per location isn't.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Splitting Attack and Parry Skills... hmm... now each melee weapon skill has two values - what if I only want to use one? Do I average them, or just use attack?

Ans what if you just give one and someone wants to use split values? Same problem. My solution would be to list both then institute a rule such as, if you are only unsing one value use the highest.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Skill Category Modifiers - should they be presented and not added, or should they be included and GMs not wishing to use them must subtract the values from existing skills?

Do the same thing they did in all those RQ and Stormbringer adventurers for year and years. Unless the PC is expected to be a reoccurring character who improves, you can ignore them. Since NPCs in adventures typically have more experience that they started with, skill scores are raised above the category mod anyway. Likewise 90% of Chaosium's NPC stat blocks only listed "significant skills".

We need what we will use in play.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Simpler Skill Bonuses - hmm... these don't really mesh with the above easily, do they?

And again don't factor into an NPC. It isn't like the NPC would be redesigned with those things in a deailed campaign. The GM writes up the opposition with the skills required to fill the role required by the adventure.

You don't roll up the NPCs like PCs and run them through adventures for 6 months until you think they are ready to be put into an adventure, do you?

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

[*]Increased Personal Skill Points, Cultural Modifiers, EDU/Knowledge rolls, etc. - do I add these for GMs who want to use them, and make GMs who don't want to use them remove them, or do I put them in a block alongside each NPC writeup?

One again, it most these things factor into the skill scores for the NPC "before play" then it doesn't matter, since the GM will write up the foes with the skills required by the adventure.

Like I said before when you write an adventure do you work up the NPCs as player characters, or do you write them up with the skills required by the scenario? That's basic GM 101 stuff.




[*]Skill Ratings Over 100% - hoo-boy! Do I want to play Elric! style, with NPCs with attack skills of 300% or more, do I want to keep things simple and say that 100% is the top? Does each skill have two ratings, based on where you want to put the limit? Over 100% and under 100%? [/quote]

This is another big one. If you don't put something in there you are basically not supporting skills over 100%. My solution would be to list the skill score over 100%. The reason being that it is easy to cap off 137% to 100%, but impossible to extrapolate 137% from 100%.

Lack of skills over 100% and hit points, AP per location translates as no support for those who use those options. If skills over 100% aren't supported, then those who reach those levels simply won't be able to use your NPCs.




I think you've done a lot to support soltakss's argument. It's looking like it will be as much work to use a BRP supplment in BRP as it will be to use it with CoC, SB5, RQ3 or even MRQ.

If Chaosium doesn't provide support for the options? Who will? Are they options or dead ends?

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

I have no idea what BRP means for CoC. I'm assuming that Charlie and Lynn have an idea, but I'm sure they're smart enough to see how BRP does before making any decisions.

It will be interesting to see if adventures are written for both games now. The last contest they did allowed submissions for either, but with BRP being a non-entity at the time, I doubt they got any BRP submissions.

[Jason Durall]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Just wondering how are you planning on handling options in Interplanetary? I would assume that certain options would be well suited towards the setting, and others not.

At the beginning of the book, I'm going to include a section stating "Here are the options that Interplanetary recommends." It will also mention the optional rules that are specifically discouraged.

If there are new optional rules, they'll be inserted into the manuscript where appropriate.

If some aspect of the adventure refers to an optional rule that might apply, it'll be mentioned, even if it isn't one of those recommended above. This will be selectively applied to avoid crudding up the manuscript overmuch.

If there's a place where the options conflict or diverge significantly from the core rules, they'll be distinguished or called out in some fashion in the text or in a side box.

What I'm hoping to avoid is NPC writeups full of alternate values, conflicting information, and values that need to be adjusted up or down depending on what options you're adding.

[Rurik]

Having tried some stat blocks that combine some options I am against using them. Sure I understand all the options, but someone new to the system would be confused by them - and that is a big problem. We want new people to like the game.

Though you can add a section at the end of a block for Hit Locations and clearly label it as optional, it is hard to make clear that you normally do not use Major Wound Level with locations, or that SR's supercede using DEX order.

I suspect the cleanest implementation would be to use the simple 'core' stats in the book, and include an appendix with say all the stat blocks from the book done up with Hit Locations and SR and seperate Attack/Parry% for example, or whatever optional rules the author recommends for the setting.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

At the beginning of the book, I'm going to include a section stating "Here are the options that Interplanetary recommends." It will also mention the optional rules that are specifically discouraged.

Cool, that is just what I was talking about. Obviously a lot of options are going to work better in some settings than others. For instance, a specific fantasy setting should probably have it's magic system (or systems) spelled out. Likewise a superhero setting is going to make a superpowers option a must have.

Originally Posted by Jason Durall

What I'm hoping to avoid is NPC writeups full of alternate values, conflicting information, and values that need to be adjusted up or down depending on what options you're adding.

I can understand that. I just don't want to see something not supported at all becuase they are "optional". Back when Chasoium was supporting mulitple product lines, fans of each set of "options" got supported.

I can certainly see not supporting things that don't make sense for certain supplements. I dobut we'd be using Superheroes and Muntant rules in Pax Romana.

But if nothing supports skills over 100%, then those who use that rule are left out in the cold.

Let's face it. Anyone who is planning on using things like hit locations, category modifiers, superpowers, skills over 100%, or variable APs probably is familiar with the rules for them already and can do so now. If none of the supplments support those options, then there isn't any reason to buy the BRP rulebook. Just buy the supplements and convert.

[RMS]

It strikes me that in this day and age, with everyone having internet access, the sensible thing would be to print supplements with the bare minimum stat blocks and then provide detailed stat blocks for free download. Why spend money printing pages of NPC stat blocks when you could put more substance in the text? Put all the verbal description of the NPC in the book and then put stat blocks available on a website. That has the bonus of allowing someone to print them out, mark them up as they play the NPCs, and then go print some new ones the next time they run the adventure.

Go ahead and tell me why this is a bad idea. I've actually thought about this before for generic RPG supplements: write up everything, but provide state blocks for a variety of game systems for free download (possibly supplying a password with the purchased game).

[The Tweaker]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

So the books really should use only the simplest, core options - to be newbie-friendly.

Those are your own words. I never said that, but I do think the inherent elegance of the system will attract more new players if you present it in a simple, easy-to-understand format to which you can later add crunch if you wish. I've seen a lot of BRP-related materials lately (conversions, original settings, etc.), and what I always find most interesting about them is that the system is very consistent, but really simple to implement at the same time. That simplicity - and the wealth of options offered for specific settings or styles of play - is what I am after.

Originally Posted by Rurik

I suspect the cleanest implementation would be to use the simple 'core' stats in the book, and include an appendix with say all the stat blocks from the book done up with Hit Locations and SR and seperate Attack/Parry% for example, or whatever optional rules the author recommends for the setting.

Pretty good idea, I'd say.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by RMS

Go ahead and tell me why this is a bad idea. I've actually thought about this before for generic RPG supplements: write up everything, but provide state blocks for a variety of game systems for free download (possibly supplying a password with the purchased game).

Unscrupulous players could find out the stats/abilities of the opposition? Apart from being unsporting, it could seriously blow plot secrets if that 'friendly' innkeeper is revealed to have Brew Pratzim 80%. And just what opposition there was should itself be secret, even if you don't care about the exact stats. (Yes, passwording it might help a little but people would get around that). It needn't be intentional cheating, either - if they were some of the few statted-up NPCs around, GMs might over-use them till they were too familiar.

Alternatively, along the same lines as the "Foes Generator" program I mentioned earlier, a utility could allow character/monster stats to be put in for a specified option - and then format-up the stat-block for other options, at the click of a radio button (or twelve...)

[Jason Durall]

Originally Posted by RMS

It strikes me that in this day and age, with everyone having internet access, the sensible thing would be to print supplements with the bare minimum stat blocks and then provide detailed stat blocks for free download. Why spend money printing pages of NPC stat blocks when you could put more substance in the text? Put all the verbal description of the NPC in the book and then put stat blocks available on a website. That has the bonus of allowing someone to print them out, mark them up as they play the NPCs, and then go print some new ones the next time they run the adventure.

Go ahead and tell me why this is a bad idea. I've actually thought about this before for generic RPG supplements: write up everything, but provide state blocks for a variety of game systems for free download (possibly supplying a password with the purchased game).

Actually, this is how I imagined things would go.

I did write up Stormbringer versions of the NPC stats for Slaves of Fate, a d20 adventure, and Chaosium had (has?) them online for free download.

[Jason Durall]

Originally Posted by RMS

It strikes me that in this day and age, with everyone having internet access, the sensible thing would be to print supplements with the bare minimum stat blocks and then provide detailed stat blocks for free download. Why spend money printing pages of NPC stat blocks when you could put more substance in the text? Put all the verbal description of the NPC in the book and then put stat blocks available on a website. That has the bonus of allowing someone to print them out, mark them up as they play the NPCs, and then go print some new ones the next time they run the adventure.

Go ahead and tell me why this is a bad idea. I've actually thought about this before for generic RPG supplements: write up everything, but provide state blocks for a variety of game systems for free download (possibly supplying a password with the purchased game).

Actually, this is how I imagined things would go. The core stats in the book, potentially with expanded optional stats presented online.

I did write up Stormbringer versions of the NPC stats for Slaves of Fate, a d20 adventure, and Chaosium had (has?) them online for free download.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by Rurik

I suspect the cleanest implementation would be to use the simple 'core' stats in the book, and include an appendix with say all the stat blocks from the book done up with Hit Locations and SR and seperate Attack/Parry% for example, or whatever optional rules the author recommends for the setting.

Hmm, tricky. If the author doesn't recommend just the core stats, it'd be a bit odd to have them right there in the main text. Maybe no stats in the main body but all in appendices - either core first, recommended second (or vice versa?) and then any extra options felt useful.