How Could BRP Be More Popular...?

[frogspawner]

This should probably be a new thread, rather than a Zombie... (Copied from Why is BRP not that popular...?)

Basically it is the BETAMAX dilemma. It doesn't matter if it is a superior machine/format if most of the machines and "tapes" people see are in VHS format.

Well, I think blaming it on VHS (read D&D) is missing the opportunity to engage in some healthy self-criticism.

The BRP rulebook does not offer balance. Compared to yesterday's games, it's a good effort, but for today, the BRP rulebook looks like a first draft, before the "tightening up your ship" and the "kill your darlings" phase.

People aren't (very) interested in toolboxes. They want focused products, where the hard work (balancing) is done for them.

[frogspawner]

Well, I think blaming it on VHS (read D&D) is missing the opportunity to engage in some healthy self-criticism.

The BRP rulebook does not offer balance. Compared to yesterday's games, it's a good effort, but for today, the BRP rulebook looks like a first draft, before the "tightening up your ship" and the "kill your darlings" phase.

People aren't (very) interested in toolboxes. They want focused products, where the hard work (balancing) is done for them.

I agree there's plenty to criticize in the new BRP but I've been holding it back because I wonder: Could we keep the criticism positive?

And what do you mean by "balance" (and the other terms)?

[Thalaba]

The BRP rulebook does not offer balance.

What does 'balance' mean, in this context - can you provide an example?

Compared to yesterday's games, it's a good effort, but for today, the BRP rulebook looks like a first draft, before the "tightening up your ship" and the "kill your darlings" phase.

Are these recognized phases of something? Please explain.

People aren't (very) interested in toolboxes. They want focused products, where the hard work (balancing) is done for them.

They do? Personally - I like a toolbox. In fact, it's what I would recommend as the approach for a generic game. All this 'tightening' you are talking about makes sense for specific settings and scenarios, but the BRP core rulebook doesn't present any of those, so why would it 'tighten'?

I'm pretty sure the 'tightening' is meant to happen at the setting/sourcebook level, where you can get pretty specific about which rules are in use and so on.

And for us do-it-yourselfers (I'm sure there are more besides me) I'm glad to have a product that doesn't assume for me what and how I want to play.

I agree there's plenty to criticize in the new BRP but I've been holding it back because I wonder: Could we keep the criticism positive?

By positive, I think you mean 'constructive' or are you referring to the tone of the language? I would agree with both, actually. I'd like to hear about the criticisms you've been holding back on - I find these types of discussions pretty valuable and they inform how I run the game. They also inform future editions. But please, explain clearly what they are so that people can discuss them in an informed manner.

[frogspawner]

By positive, I think you mean 'constructive' or are you referring to the tone of the language?

Yes, I do mean the criticism should be constructive. And it'd be nice if the tone could be optimistic/positive too. (For example, the old thread's title really bothered me!)

Immediately breaking my own positivity 'rule', the biggest criticism I have is the old saw about opposed rolls (which I don't like). Virtually everything else in the new BRP has toolbox-style options - which is fine by me (being a GM) - but RAW combat has to use that darned OR mechanism, curse it! That's a big change from any other BRP-based system I know about (RQ2/3, CoC, OBRP) - so why introduce it? And why is there no alternative? The only positive thing I can think of about this is that the combat rules section is quite hard to follow, so people won't necessarily realize that's what's meant... And the book's so thick my players probably won't ever read it closely enough to know I'm not playing it like that... :rolleyes:

OK, now that's out of the way - the only way is up!

[Rurik]

Most all of us here are longtime fans of BRP and used to taking bits and pieces from one BRP system and mixing them with another, so a toolkit appeals to us. One big book with a lot of options replaces stacks of rulebooks from our personal museums of BRP history - awesome!

But the topic is "How could BRP be more popular?". I agree that it suffers from a lack of focus. It is big, and with so many rules and optional rules thrown at a new reader it can be overwhelming. The fact of the matter is the average new player only needs a fraction of the rules presented and could easily get by with an 80-100 page book (if even), but they have now way of knowing which rules they need or which pages to read, so they are stuck with a monster tome that usually presents them with an overwhelming array of rules and optional rules.

BRP is a simple and elegant system that is very easy to grasp. My wife is not a gamer, but one game she does like is Call of Cthulhu. She could care less about rules or mechanics, and has no problem playing Call because the system is so intuitive. A library use of 75 means you have a 75% chance of successfully researching a subject in a library. She grasps that immediately, and knows that a 75 in a skill is good while a 25 is not so good. For all the talk of rules light systems she would not know what a 17W2 in HeroQuest means or a Library Use pool of 7 means in Trail of Cthulhu or how grasp bidding in say Dogs in the Vineyard. For all the accusations of being to rules heavy and outdated I think BRP is still one of the easiest systems to grasp.

But I don't think that fact - that BRP is a simple, logical, quick and elegant system comes through in reading the big book of BRP. A smaller, more focused book, maybe even genre specific, without optional rules, would be much better for growing the popularity of the system.

In all fairness the goal of BRP was not to produce a streamlined product intended as an introduction to BRP. The goal was to collect most all of the BRP rules from across time and editions in one place, and it does that well. It is a reward to us longtime fans who have been loyal to the system over the years and we have been well rewarded. Thank you Jason and Chaosium Dudes.

But it is not, IMHO, the best vehicle for introducing new players to the system.

[rust]

I think roleplaying games are "a bit like food". Some people, perhaps the ma-
jority, like their meals "ready to eat", others prefer to do the cooking them-
selves.

I usually play roleplaying games because I have an idea of a specific setting
and would like to know what would happen to this setting under the influen-
ce of a certain kind of player characters.

To make this experiment, I have to work out the setting as well as the cha-
racters' options (abilities, skills, equipment, etc.) within the setting, and for
this I need a toolbox like BRP.

As for "out of the box" games, well, they are other people's fantasies, not
mine, and I usually find them not very fascinating.

Positive criticism of BRP ... I have no idea, all I would want to criticize [this
word looks strange, I hope it does exist] is the lack of material for some of
the genres I am interested in, but this material will most probably be produ-
ced in the not so far future (or I will have to produce it).

Otherwise, there are so many options, and it is so easy to design additional
ones, that I am missing nothing, and can easily replace what I do not like.

[deleriad]

I think Rurik is right to say that the BRP rulebook is a good tool for experienced players who have been playing BRP for a long time. It's not so good for bringing fresh blood in.

I suspect the best means to bring in new players are good standalone products built using BRP that are fun to play in and of themselves. Classic Fantasy - though not to my taste - would be an example. Soltak's "I can't Believe It's Not Traveller" would be another.

I do believe however that BRP could do with a "Basic" system that isn't overloaded with modular options; i.e. putting the Basic back into basic. In many ways modules such as hit Locations and Strike Ranks are genre emulators and, really, would be better in specific genre books.

In my world there would be 196 page book that presents a basic universal roleplaying system with the selling point that it is simple. Not sure how to do something? Pick a skill or stat and roll percentile dice. If you have that and good standalones powered by BRP then you get a system that can be quickly picked up and played.

That said, it'll never be more than a niche market but provided it is capable of a critical mass of interest then that is fine.

[kaddawang]

As a set if rules, it's golden(although not flawless, but very easy to houserule). And it does get mentioned alot, and most of it positive.

BRP is not popular because it has no support.
Many of the monographs are very good, but they are not exactly easily available(and most suffer from being amateur works; poor graphics and layout).
The Rome-supplement is awesome, but historical games have never been the hottest bun.
Newt's d101games' plans are exiting, though.

Call of Cthulhu is the only well-known BRP-game, along with Mongoose's RuneQuest. Incidentally, those are also the only lines that receive support in the form of regularly published, official supplements.

Until Chaosium wins the lottery, BRP will be languishing in the cellar.
Which is a shame.

Edit: and for it's size. The BRP Quickstart is a brilliant free download that condences the basics in less than 40 pages. It is a very good intro.

[PK Games]

For me it is presentation. Lets face it, the core book is boring. It is unispiring. Dont get me wrong, I love BRP, have several of the games based on the system and supplements as well and some of the books are very enticing, just not the new one.

A hardback book with a better cover, and more eye popping art and a better layout would draw much more attention. For example, the system presenting in Dark Heresy is a percentile system and overall very similar to how BRP works (for the most part at least), but the reason why the books sell is they are pretty and eyecatching and fun to read. In the new BRP core book, its just rule after rule after rule with some not so good artwork crammed inbetween.

[Mugen]

I don't know if it is the same in other countries, but in France the biggest problem of BRP is that people only know it through Call of Cthulhu.

AFAIK, the biggest complaints are :

*Very limited impact of characteristics on skills;
*Mortality;
*Boring combat;
*The 1-100 scale.

All aspects which have been addressed in an incarnation of BRP or another...

I even saw some people describing James Bond 007 resolution system as genius and criticizing BRP...