BRP The Edition Wars To End All Wars

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Mankcam said:
It's weird that I dig this and don't at the same time.

But you definately answered the question "Why is there a Duck on the OpenQuest cover?"
:grin:
Click to expand...

I can also see that some, like me, may dig Glorantha and BRP but find RQ and Mythras a mite too crunchy for their tastes.

How is magic handled in OQ? RQ-ish I assume?
 
Voros said:
I can also see that some, like me, may dig Glorantha and BRP but find RQ and Mythras a mite too crunchy for their tastes.

How is magic handled in OQ? RQ-ish I assume?
Click to expand...
I have to take a good look at how things work in OQ3, but previous versions have very RQ-ish magic.

I think I like that the new edition has retitled 'Battle Magic' as 'Personal Magic' - such a better name as much of it never was soley for used in battles anyway.

You can pretty much play Gloranthan magic (as presented in RQ) with the magic systems in OQ, they are pretty similar, if not the same. You just need to tie the concept of Runes to Divine Magic, and then it's Gloranthan again

OQ plays very similar to RQ, but doesn't have hit locations, skills have broad brush strokes, and modifers are also broad and hand-wavey.

I guess the whole vibe of the game feels more handwavey than RQ and Mythras, which I like. It's very loose and reminds me of my adolescent BRP games which were unshackled by lore and rules lawyering.

I think this is what I really like about OQ is that it is a basic framework which doesn't take itself too seriously.

I doubt I will use OQ for Glorantha, given that RQG does Glorantha so well, but it wouldn't be hard to play Glorantha with OQ, it's a really close fit.

I can see myself using OQ for numerous fantasy homebrews - ones that lighter play may help portray the setting better than gritty play - for the later I would use Mythras.

As an example, I have two homebrew projects rumbling around in my head:

One is porting The Witcher setting to BRP, and I think Mythras will be perfect for it.

The other is I am thinking of doing a Grimm Fairie Tales style setting, a bit whimsical but also dark and fable-like at times. For this one I feel the lighter mechanics of OQ will perfectly suit.

We'll see if I get these off the ground or not...
 
Last edited:
@mankam
Mankcam said:
Well it's odd that my line about Ducks has got so much airplay, when the main gist of what I was saying was promoting OQ in a positive light, esp given that I'm a pretty enthusiastic supporter of OQ.
Click to expand...

Apologies if I came off a bit heavy-handed in my reply.
 
Newt Newport said:
@mankam


Apologies if I came off a bit heavy-handed in my reply.
Click to expand...
None taken Newt
I was referring more to my earlier post regarding OQ, as the thread derailed into a duck-thread due to one of my off-hand comments.

BTW I have backed your products for a while, and well aware of your duck fanaticism, heh heh
I've had to accept it's part and parcel of the loose vibe you imbue into the rules, which is something I really appreciate (see my previous post).

Glad you have shown up in these forums, we have a decent appreciation of BRP here.
Mythras seems to be the biggie, but there's wiggle room for OQ, and I often throw it's merits into our conversations.

Anyway, no offence taken! :grin:
 
Last edited:
K_Peterson said:
I also use DG's "Using a Skill without a Roll" rule - where, if circumstances are calm and controlled, tasks will be successful if the PC's skill is in an appropriate range. For example, if a task requires someone to have some basic training in, a skill of 30-39% accomplishes it without the need for a roll. Or for a task that requires someone with professional experience, a PC will be successful with a skill level of 40-59%. It's only in the cases that a PC rushes things, or takes serious risk will the dice come out.
Click to expand...

I like that a lot. It should be the norm when playing BRP games. It's just codified common sense.

And Mythras says more or less the same in the "Automatic Successes" and "When to roll?" sections. They should just clarify it a bit with some percentage examples, as Delta Green has done, in the next printings.
 
Last edited:
I have had a rule like this for years in my BRP games, but for the life of me I can't remember where I initially read it.

We go with if it's an easy task and it's not dramatically beneficial to call for a roll, than anyone with 60% or higher in a skill doesn't need to roll - we assume they have succeeded.

If a skill is known at 60% or more, there really isn't much point actually rolling when an Easy task grants such big bonuses (BGB doubles the skill chance, Mythras grants a +40%, OQ grants a +50%, etc etc). You would only do it to see if the character scores a Crit or a Fumble - if it's just a routine situation then there isn't much point slowing the narrative down for a dice roll.

If the situation is more exciting with a dice roll, then that's a different story.

Not sure when we moved to this rule, or if we read it, but it's just a logical thing to do. Having it codified might be good for new players.

I actually like Raleel Raleel's suggestion of having a 55% threshold, I think that fits the ability categories nicely.
 
Last edited:
Mankcam said:
I actually like @Raleel's suggestion of having a 55% threshold, I think that fits the ability categories nicely.
Click to expand...
That number was picked out of the air at random. it was largely meant to say "if you have over X, where X is the number in the parenthesis, you don't need to roll". 55 just happens to be a little into the professional range of mythras. this is a good rule for unopposed rolls i think
 
ffilz said:
Also, with the 2 attribute total system, how are skills that can't be used untrained handled? Do attributes never come into play with them?
Click to expand...

Consider the two attribute total the "modifier" and I think you'll see how its usually done; untrained skills have a training overhead to get them usable, and as soon as you do, the jump to the base.
 
K_Peterson said:
I'm not sure about the starting points. I've not compared OQ to other systems to get an idea of whether its inflated or not.

I've got a pdf of OpenQuest Basic handy, and this is the breakdown of how you apply points among the Skill Categories:

View attachment 27478

This breakdown - to me - just feels weirdly arbitrary and limiting. Maybe it's because I'm so used to BRP systems that offer free skill point spends, or the allocations of points occurs in a more logical manner. It feels like you'd get pretty similar characters, and I don't like that in my BRP-play.
Click to expand...
The usual purpose of that sort of scheme is to avoid one-trick ponies or at least really narrow characters without forcing a hard-coded set of skill requirements. OQ isn't the only game I've seen do it; the new Alternity and Fragged Empire do something similar.
 
I only have skill rolls when there was a specific negative consequence to failure. Do you use up valuable resources? Roll. Are your in a rush? Roll. Will shit happen? Roll. Is it a lazy Sunday and you have 4 hours and a nice cuppa? No roll necessary. You succeed at your own pace.

I’ll use the different skill levels as a determinant of how long it takes. The higher the skill level the sooner you finish.
 
This is as good a place as any to ask this I guess :smile:

I am a recent Mythras convert, without a shadow of a doubt it´s one of the highest quality books in my library and even session has been a blast to play. It really is that good.

Having said that, I did get some legend books back in the day but I got never got around to trying them out, being obsessed with everything Mythras I decided to read the books to mine for materials. My gut feeling after reading it is that Legend is a bit simpler and gamier than Mythras, you can tell that the latter is more refined, but seems like the former creates more powerful characters (less punitive penalties overall, common magic being what it is and heroic abilities).

So my question is, is there any merit to running legend instead of Mythras, does anyone actually prefer Legend as a game? (aside from the obvious benefit of being OGL of course)
 
Hortum said:
This is as good a place as any to ask this I guess :smile:

I am a recent Mythras convert, without a shadow of a doubt it´s one of the highest quality books in my library and even session has been a blast to play. It really is that good.

Having said that, I did get some legend books back in the day but I got never got around to trying them out, being obsessed with everything Mythras I decided to read the books to mine for materials. My gut feeling after reading it is that Legend is a bit simpler and gamier than Mythras, you can tell that the latter is more refined, but seems like the former creates more powerful characters (less punitive penalties overall, common magic being what it is and heroic abilities).

So my question is, is there any merit to running legend instead of Mythras, does anyone actually prefer Legend as a game? (aside from the obvious benefit of being OGL of course)
Click to expand...

The books are indeed beautiful, very well-written, and the system is rock solid.

But really, one of my main reasons for going with Mythras (over all the other BRP systems) is that it's a living system. It's actively being supported with new books and adventures and the stuff in the pipeline looks really cool. I also like that the designers and the people doing the heavy lifting are all readily available in here and in the Mythras discord.
 
Hortum said:
So my question is, is there any merit to running legend instead of Mythras, does anyone actually prefer Legend as a game? (aside from the obvious benefit of being OGL of course)
Click to expand...
I prefer running MRQ2 or Legend over Mythras. MRQ2 was my entry point to this versioning of RuneQuest and it stuck with me ever since. Legend is just MRQ2 with RuneQuest references removed. One benefit of Legend is that it's currently 60 cents in pdf (though typically priced at $1). And you can do a lot with that 60 cent investment, IMO. It's cheap, it's solid, it's a lot of fun.

Legend could definitely be considered more "game-y" in some respects, especially with the heroic abilities. I've never made use of them; I find them a little silly - being content with hero points as the main gamey element.

Mythras is definitely an expanded and revised form of MRQ2/Legend, and that clearly has an appeal to many. I find it too dense for my taste, and I don't find it as easy of a framework or toolkit to work with. I didn't care for the renaming of skills; the general weakening of characters (reduced point-buy pool; I've not compared skill point totals); didn't need mechanics like Passions; didn't really like the interior presentation (apart from the artwork, which is hands-down better).
 
well, if you prefer the mechanics of Legend, with its small numeric modifiers, that would be one reason. Legend was written by the same folks, and Mythras is an evolution of the same system. I would dispute that Legend is simpler or creates more powerful characters, but they do things in different ways. Legend characters get common magic out of the gate, and it's quite reasonable for mythras characters to get folk magic at creation. Most of the heroic abilities have Gifts that map to them or abilities from the magic lines that are equivalent.

Myself, I would port over the stuff I like about Legend (some of the heroic abilities, or the structure of them perhaps) and then use Mythras as the core. There is a design ethos behind Mythras i enjoy that is not present in Legend. I have ported adventures from Legend up to Mythras and it works just fine, even more smoothly in some ways. Heroic abilities can be ported over rather directly as well, and you may want hero points as well (though much of their functionality is in Luck Points). You can up the points of the character build, or use the pulp rules in the Companion.

This is a very friendly edition war - we all know we can port around and level of detail you prefer is the real ground :smile:

Come over to the mythras discord at https://discord.gg/RqwyHdG and chat more if you like, though there are MANY mythras fans on here, and I don't pay any of them to say that!
 
Paragon said:
The usual purpose of that sort of scheme is to avoid one-trick ponies or at least really narrow characters without forcing a hard-coded set of skill requirements.
Click to expand...
I can understand that being the intention. I'm curious if that would actually solve anything with OQ - mix/maxing players will still push the limits, and invest in the 'premier' skills and ignore others. IMO, the constrained skill category spends make it more difficult to diversify and make interesting characters.
 
K_Peterson said:
I can understand that being the intention. I'm curious if that would actually solve anything with OQ - mix/maxing players will still push the limits, and invest in the 'premier' skills and ignore others. IMO, the constrained skill category spends make it more difficult to diversify and make interesting characters.
Click to expand...

I think skill caps are mostly helpful to reduce accidental over specialization. The only cure for min / maxers and other rules lawyers is a GM who will punish bad behavior.
 
Toadmaster said:
I think skill caps are mostly helpful to reduce accidental over specialization. The only cure for min / maxers and other rules lawyers is a GM who will punish bad behavior.
Click to expand...
Sure, I've got no problem with that. Or to limit PCs from being masters at skills right out of the gate. My only gripe is with skill category caps.

One GM "punishment" is presenting obstacles that involve more than just combat, or are not based on just physical challenges. If challenges also involve the "min" skills, those players will typically realize the "cure" when their PCs suffer from the outcome.
 
K_Peterson said:
Sure, I've got no problem with that. Or to limit PCs from being masters at skills right out of the gate. My only gripe is with skill category caps.

One GM "punishment" is presenting obstacles that involve more than just combat, or are not based on just physical challenges. If challenges also involve the "min" skills, those players will typically realize the "cure" when their PCs suffer from the outcome.
Click to expand...

Yep, just a matter of the GM not letting them get away with it. Min / max only works when they know what aspects can be ignored. So sad you put all your points into combat, because what you need right now is a good swimming skill. :cry: Maybe on the next character. :hehe:
 
Well, I'm not going to claim that the OQ approach actively prevents the problem, but at the very least it should prevent things like "I literally spent all my skill points on combat skills, Riding and Perception" since there are other categories. There are probably winners and losers within those categories as to how useful a skill is, but it at least means you have to invest in some of them.
 
Paragon said:
Well, I'm not going to claim that the OQ approach actively prevents the problem, but at the very least it should prevent things like "I literally spent all my skill points on combat skills, Riding and Perception" since there are other categories. There are probably winners and losers within those categories as to how useful a skill is, but it at least means you have to invest in some of them.
Click to expand...
"I see you don't mention Detect Lies".
 
Paragon said:
IME usually something a group has a specialist for.
Click to expand...
*jotting notes about a mysterious hooded stranger getting a strong liking for that character when other PCs ain't around*
 
You can always cook the books against someone who ignores a skill, but I never found it a virtue to go out of my way to do that if its not happening naturally.
 
Paragon said:
You can always cook the books against someone who ignores a skill, but I never found it a virtue to go out of my way to do that if its not happening naturally.
Click to expand...

Agree I much prefer to just not cut them any slack when they make it a habit to disregard entire skill categories.
 
Simlasa said:
So why are ducks any sillier than dogs/cats/bears/rats? Just their association with Donald, Daffy and Howard?
Click to expand...
Ducks are silly creatures. They are dumb, noisy, and obnoxious. They leave foul runny poop everywhere which they sometimes eat and play around in. I don't feel bad about eating them or chickens.
 
Paragon said:
You can always cook the books against someone who ignores a skill, but I never found it a virtue to go out of my way to do that if its not happening naturally.
Click to expand...
Thing is, that's actually modus operandi for many NPCs I've ran over the years:thumbsup:. The "jots down" part is just me joking in the thread.
And no, I don't find it a virtue, either. But it happens without me trying.

"You're new to the group, so listen: with Asen as GM, the optimised variant is all stats at 10!" - my players in Fates Worse Than Death to a newly-joined player while he was making his PC:grin:!
 
Toadmaster said:
Agree I much prefer to just not cut them any slack when they make it a habit to disregard entire skill categories.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's no reason to actively encourage that behavior. I'm just really leery of suggestions that seem to add up to "The GM can make you live in regret" because, yeah, that's absolutely true, but I tend to find having to distort my campaign decision making to deal with problem areas is, itself, a problem.
 
Brock Savage said:
Ducks are silly creatures. They are dumb, noisy, and obnoxious. They leave foul runny poop everywhere which they sometimes eat and play around in. I don't feel bad about eating them or chickens.
Click to expand...

BBQ duck from Chinatown, bought at my favourite shop where the old lady who runs it only accepts cash and cuts it up for you right there with a big cleaver, is f****** delcious too.
 
Paragon said:
Yeah, there's no reason to actively encourage that behavior. I'm just really leery of suggestions that seem to add up to "The GM can make you live in regret" because, yeah, that's absolutely true, but I tend to find having to distort my campaign decision making to deal with problem areas is, itself, a problem.
Click to expand...
And that's why I specified I'm not having to distort my decision-making (joking aside, of course, but then joking isn't exactly a change in my behaviour:shade:).
 
My impression is that D&D may not the 'lingua franca' here in the RPG Pub like it usually is in rpg forums.

Sure, D&D (5E, 13A, OSR) is hughly popular here, but doesn't seem overwhelmingly so - not as it is in some of the bigger rpg forums where people often play D&D almost to the exclusion of other rpgs.
The commercial prominence of D&D has been a fact since time began, and it remains so to this day.

Often I read here that BRP is looked upon just as favourably, if not moreso, than D&D.
Much more than in most open rpg forums.
What is also unusual for BRP is that in the Pub banter it is not so much the Chaosium games of Call of Cthulhu and RuneQuest: Adventures in Glorantha which are prominent - it seems that Mythras is definately getting the bandwidth here.

I'm happily stoked with this. as it's one of my favourite rpgs, essientially being a more contemporary version of RuneQuest, minus Glorantha as a setting.
I still play and run other rpgs (including D&D), but BRP remains my favourite, and Mythras sits at the top of this pile in terms of game mechanics.

I'm just wondering what is attracting other people to BRP, especially Mythras, and why are we all congregating here?
:grin:
 
Last edited:
Mythras made fighters not suck. It opened up multiple axes of effect. It is a very good read, and very well written. Monster Island makes me giggle evilly.

why here? I don't know, actually.

edit: ok, a search through the history - CRK brings up Mythras first, and I follow shortly, then Tristram. All via Conan/S&S.
 
Last edited:
Mankcam said:
I'm just wondering what is attracting other people to Mythras, and why are we all congregating here?
Click to expand...
Honestly, it was people on this board. When I asked questions and expressed my dislike of d100, everyone was very cool as they overcame my objections, persuading me to give it a second look. It all kind of clicked for me when some Pubbers convinced me that Mythras would be an excellent system for the Hyborian Age.
 
Percentile Dice always feel very intuitive for me when it comes to a core mechanic for ability rolls. That is common in all BRP games.

In terms of nuts & bolts, Mythras feels like a more contemporary version of RQ3. Even their Mythic Earth collection is a realisation of RQ3's vision of Fantasy Earth.

I like the way the system builds characters with Cultures, Professions, and such; as well as the gritty combat system with tactile hit locations and cinematic manuvers. Perfect for Ancient World and Dark Ages settings.

If wanting to make it feel a tad more Conan-esque, then the Pulp Character rules in the Mythras Companion look like it hits the spot. That way it should capture the vibe of pulpy characters against a gritty canvas - which is great for feeling like Conan, Grey Mouser, etc.

I almost ran Hyborian Age with Mythras, I still might do so, and I see that a few of us have already done so.

It's interesting to see that a reasonable number of Pubbers are trying Mythras out (and other rpgs).
It's also a good sign that people here value their hobby, rather than blindly following the commercial whims of the bigger rpg companies.
 
Last edited:
Mankcam said:
My impression is that D&D may not the 'lingua franca' here in the RPG Pub like it usually is in rpg forums.

Often I read here that BRP is looked upon just as favourably, if not moreso, than D&D. Much more than in most open rpg forums.

What is also unusual for BRP is that in the Pub banter it is not so much the Chaosium games of Call of Cthulhu and RuneQuest: Adventures in Glorantha which are prominent - it seems that Mythras is definately getting the bandwidth here.


I'm just wondering what is attracting other people to BRP, especially Mythras, and why are we all congregating here?
:grin:
Click to expand...
Well, by its very "no politics, no explicit rules, just be cool" this forum attracts logical people who don't like unnecessary distractions, and like things straightforward, if maybe with some embellishments...:grin:
The same kind of people are, of course, attracted to a good traditional d100 system. And the "most contemporary" d100 system that remains in the traditional* camp, is undoubtedly Mythras.

So it was just a natural development of our SWO-ness:devil:!

*Unlike Revolution d100, which crosses the line in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top