Announcing the Basic Roleplaying System Reference Document and Open Game License

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
No. It was high time for them to polish and create the best possible ruleset for the game, moving forward. It is never high time to just introduce new rules for the sake of it. The problem with 7E isn’t that they introduced new rules, its that the rules introduced were heavy handed and poorly implemented, while much needed improvements in the game, like pruning away at the overly narrow skills in the game, for example, were overlooked.

What was going to be the selling point. Here is rehash of a rehash why don't you buy the same rehash again. For me to buy a new edition it has to have a minimum of 30% new material if not more. I would not have been at all interested in 7E if it was the same thing just with a new cover, interior art and no changes. I would have remained with 6E. They were losing market share to other similar rpgs from other companies. Keeping the status quo would have been a mistake imo.
 
The thing with 7E was, most fans (at least online) seemed to want a book that was better organized, better looking and more clearly explained in places, and they were all pointing towards the then-current French edition of CoC as an example of what they wanted.

This was mostly what we got. The book has better production values than 6E, is arguably better organized and more clearly explained or streamlined in places. But it also has a lot of new or extra stuff that people have varying opinions about, but not many thought was needed. Most of this stuff is like house rules.

The Luck rules, on the other hand, change the way the game is played and are hard to remove from the game now.
Expendable Luck is strictly optional so it can be ignored/removed without a problem.

I've run a good amount of CoC 7e for both new players and vets and haven't had the Listen/Spot Hidden skills questioned, and no one found the characteristics confusing either.
I'm in complete agreement regarding Luck though and have been happily ignoring that.
Though the distinction between Listen and Spot Hidden seems somewhat arbitrary, it has never been questioned at my table either. I was running the game using 6E, but Listen and Spot Hidden are separate skills there as well.
 
Last edited:
What was going to be the selling point. Here is rehash of a rehash why don't you buy the same rehash again. For me to buy a new edition it has to have a minimum of 30% new material if not more. I would not have been at all interested in 7E if it was the same thing just with a new cover, interior art and no changes. I would have remained with 6E. They were losing market share to other similar rpgs from other companies. Keeping the status quo would have been a mistake imo.
Well, first of all, this is a bit of a straw man argument. I didn’t argue that the new edition should have a rehash or maintain a status quo. I argued that they should provide the game with the best possible ruleset - and that is clearly not the same thing as a rehash. It is a desire for excellence, not the status quo.

There are a number of reasons to buy a new edition, and they don’t all require a load of new rules. The argument about ‘why should I buy when they don’t change the rules..’ also needs to take into account things like backwards compatibility, or ‘why should I buy this when its rules invalidate all the supplements I have previously bought’ or 'why should I buy this when I liked the rules as they were’ too.

When Delta Green was released it had, if anything, even more radical changes than 7E, but they were well thought out and justified by the design goal of the game. The game felt more familiar because they only changed what needed to be changed to support the game’s premise, the premise itself was expected and the rules were designed well to meet that expectation.

I think that Call of Cthulhu 7E also had design goals but the design goals at times felt like they were to simply make the game more action orientated, and the execution of those goals was also heavy handed. The Luck rules are a case in point. I also think they were selective in their goals, choosing what they thought were priorities but ignoring criticisms made by others during playtest.

In the case of the art and layout, I always thought the cover choice of 7E was strange - its basically exactly the same as the 6th edition cover, but setting the scene about 30 seconds later in effect as Cthulhu approaches. It is a more ‘in your face’ depiction of Cthulhu rather than a better depiction - and this is largely symbolic about how I feel about the rules changes in the game. The game is less subtle than it was, and more 'in your face’.

Sometimes, ‘evolution’ rather than ‘revolution’ is better in a new edition - a design brief used by Mongoose Traveller 2nd Edition with some success for example. It is a question of how well the game is designed, not just that you changed it, that will determine whether customers will buy it. Moreover, if somebody decides that they are going to have to change 30% of Pendragon’s ruleset in the proposed 6th edition, just for the sake of change, you can take it from me now there is going to be a lot of annoyed customers.
 
Last edited:
The thing with 7E was, most fans (at least online) seemed to want a book that was better organized, better looking and more clearly explained in places, and they were all pointing towards the then-current French edition of CoC as an example of what they wanted.

This was mostly what we got. The book has better production values than 6E, is arguably better organized and more clearly explained or streamlined in places. But it also has a lot of new or extra stuff that people have varying opinions about, but not many thought was needed. Most of this stuff is like house rules.

Expendable Luck is strictly optional so it can be ignored/removed without a problem.

Though the distinction between Listen and Spot Hidden seems somewhat arbitrary, it has never been questioned at my table either. I was running the game using 6E, but Listen and Spot Hidden are separate skills there as well.
I regard it as less streamlined - the previous edition managed to fit the entire ruleset into 100 pages. The 7E decided to expand out the rules, particularly in the Combat and Chases chapter. In previous editions, they didn’t even have Combat and Chases chapters because the rules for each were much more concisely written and not prioritised as much.

The production standards were a progressive set of incremental change from edition to edition - it was actually the case that the 6E layout, itself a copy of the 20th anniversary edition, was designed by Pegasus Spiele and won awards when it was originally released. The 7E made colour interiors and had new art, but the 6th edition was considered outstanding for its time too.

Expendable Luck is nominally optional in the rules as presented, but this was because there was a huge outcry against them in playtesting and it is difficult to ignore them when they are printed on every character sheet and referenced in every supplement. There is now an expectation to use them from many players.

And yes, the distinction between Listen and Spot Hidden has always been there, but this is an example of the sort of change that could have happened, but didn’t in the new edition.
 
There are a number of reasons to buy a new edition, and they don’t all require a load of new rules. The argument about ‘why should I buy when they don’t change the rules..’ also needs to take into account things like backwards compatibility, or ‘why should I buy this when its rules invalidate all the supplements I have previously bought’ or 'why should I buy this when I liked the rules as they were’ too.

Backward Compability is just another way of asking that nothing change for fear that older material is no longer usable. I actually respect that even if I disagree. Again if the company is not offering me nothing new, streamlined or makes the rpg run faster. I have no reason to buy let alone look at the unchanged edition as it offers me nothing as a consumer that I don't already have.

When Delta Green was released it had, if anything, even more radical changes than 7E, but they were well thought out and justified by the design goal of the game. The game felt more familiar because they only changed what needed to be changed to support the game’s premise, the premise itself was expected and the rules were designed well to meet that expectation.

I really need to get a copy or a buy the PDF for DG as I hear good things about it.

In the case of the art and layout, I always thought the cover choice of 7E was strange - its basically exactly the same as the 6th edition cover, but setting the scene about 30 seconds later in effect as Cthulhu approaches. It is a more ‘in your face’ depiction of Cthulhu rather than a better depiction - and this is largely symbolic about how I feel about the rules changes in the game. The game is less subtle than it was, and more 'in your face’.

I agree the art and layout is strange in 7E. I expected more for full color.


Sometimes, ‘evolution’ rather than ‘revolution’ is better in a new edition - a design brief used by Mongoose Traveller 2nd Edition with some success for example. It is a question of how well the game is designed, not just that you changed it, that will determine whether customers will buy it. Moreover, if somebody decides that they are going to have to change 30% of Pendragon’s ruleset in the proposed 6th edition, just for the sake of change, you can take it from me now there is going to be a lot of annoyed customers.

I think that new edition of rpgs are Catch-22 damned if you and don't. As one needs to balance releasing new material for new fans vs keeping it backwards compability and little to no change.
 
On the perception thing, I liked how it worked in HERO, where you just had perception, but instead of buying a blanket increase, for less points you could increase it for just one sense. So most people would just increase general perception, but if there were a reason to focus on just one that could be done, say for a safe cracker who has finely tuned ears, but may be relatively average in the other senses.

Spot hidden is a bit more than just perception, also being used to find hidden compartments and such. Under the BRP skill system I agree it is splitting hairs too much. It would be fine in a game that has branching skills where it could be a more tightly focused add on to a core skill (perception). Having separate spot hidden and listen also brings up the issue of smells which in CoC could be a critical ability yet falls under neither. One could say the same for taste or touch as well, but by that point it is probably too late. :hehe:


I think that new edition of rpgs are Catch-22 damned if you and don't. As one needs to balance releasing new material for new fans vs keeping it backwards compability and little to no change.

Agree, keep the current fan base (who already own everything) happy or make changes to attract new blood (that may not exist) and risk alienating the existing fan base. Making both groups happy is like the holy grail of game design.
 
Yeah, I have been a bit surprised to see Chaosium has so much ill will towards them, even having a snarky nickname nuChaosium.

I'm not a fan of some of the changes in 7e CoC (luck points, the chase rules) while I do like others (stats being percentage just makes sense for a percentile system, removes an unnecessary step). But it is essentially still the same game and it is easy to ignore those changes I don't like.

RQG is a great book and is a solid extension of RQII, which is a great game if a bit too crunchy for my tastes. Ditto Mythras so for me so really I don't have a dog in that particular edition war, for Glorantha I'd rather have a game based on the simpler Stormbringer system or a hack of Pendragon's mechanics plus rune magic. I don't have much interest personally in playing any kind of RQ-y game that isn't in Glorantha, although I do really dig the Mythras historical supplements, I think I'd use something less crunchy for them.

But more importantly they are keeping Pendragon in print, have re-released the wonderful Prince Valiant, have revived Glorantha and I've really liked the CoC investigation books I've read (see below) and would like to run them soon. Ultimately that is what matters to me, the game, not the backroom industry politics.

CHA23149_-_Reign_of_Terror_Front_Cover_900x700__11151.1505155402.1280.1280.jpg

CHA23152_-_Petersens_Abomination_Front_Cover__39263.1511402951.1280.1280.jpg

Want to get this one, decadent Weimar-era Berlin is the perfect setting for CoC. I've also heard very good things about Pulp Cthulhu and Dark Trails.

Berlin_The_Wicked_City_-_Front_Cover_-_700-900_-_PDF__02353.1552354849.1280.1280.jpg
 
Last edited:
The only CoC book I considered ugly was 6e... the layout and use of stupid fonts is egregious.
 
I think they dropped Prince Valiant, didn’t they?
 
Hmm...I just checked their site and your right, it isn't currently available.
I think they mentioned it last year in a newsletter. I can’t remember if they dropped it or just lost it as a licence. I can’t think who else would own it though - Nocturnal?
 
I think they mentioned it last year in a newsletter. I can’t remember if they dropped it or just lost it as a licence. I can’t think who else would own it though - Nocturnal?

Not currently on their site either, perhaps the license lapsed. Bummer. Or maybe it just sold out and they're waiting to do a reprint?
 
RQG is a great book and is a solid extension of RQII, which is a great game if a bit too crunchy for my tastes. Ditto Mythras so for me so really I don't have a dog in that particular edition war
We've used both for our Gloranthan game. RQG is a gorgeous book. If you love Glorantha I'd recommend "The Glorantha Sourcebook". It's pure fluff no mechanics.

CHA4033_-_Glorantha_Sourcebook_-_Front_Cover_-_700__75282.1532045239.500.659.jpg
 
Not currently on their site either, perhaps the license lapsed. Bummer. Or maybe it just sold out and they're waiting to do a reprint?
Thing I am struggling with is who would they be licensing it from? Greg Stafford wrote it, and its new edition was commissioned through Nocturnal, which was Stewart Weick’s company. Sadly, both are deceased. Yet I definitely recall Chaosium saying they dropped or lost or didn’t renew the licence. To who?
 
Some group related to the original comic strip?
 
Personally, I think the best thing Chaosium has done for CoC7e is Down Darker Trails.
 
RQG is a great book and is a solid extension of RQII, which is a great game if a bit too crunchy for my tastes. Ditto Mythras so for me so really I don't have a dog in that particular edition war,

you have to take a side!!! you can't kill internet arguments like this. it's unholy!
 
I haven't really read it but would Legend a good base to build something like Ringworld off of?

Chaosium did a Ringworld game back in the 80s, it is probably unobtanium now but you never know. It was a BRP variant so assuming that game was any good I don't see why Legend wouldn't work.


I think they dropped Prince Valiant, didn’t they?

I found a post over at BRP Central from last June asking this question. MOB responded that Nocturnal's license had expired.

Prince Valiant dropped?
 
Last edited:
Chaosium did a Ringworld game back in the 80s, it is probably unobtanium now but you never know. It was a BRP variant so assuming that game was any good I don't see why Legend wouldn't work.
Ringworld was a neat game but with an intimidating concept - if you think a planet is too much to get your head around, what about something with the area of 3 million earths? I'm not sure about the legal issues, as I believe the concept of a ringworld actually originated with Niven, who based it on a sort of budget Dyson Sphere.
 
Ringworld was a neat game but with an intimidating concept - if you think a planet is too much to get your head around, what about something with the area of 3 million earths? I'm not sure about the legal issues, as I believe the concept of a ringworld actually originated with Niven, who based it on a sort of budget Dyson Sphere.

The game was licensed from Niven's Ringworld novel, that is why we're unlikely to see it ever reissued I think.
 
The game was licensed from Niven's Ringworld novel, that is why we're unlikely to see it ever reissued I think.
To clarify, I was responding to Bunch's post about using Legend to create something like the old Ringworld game. The difficulty would not be the mechanics, but the ringworld concept itself which might be considered part of the Known Space IP.
 
Ringworld was a neat game but with an intimidating concept - if you think a planet is too much to get your head around, what about something with the area of 3 million earths? I'm not sure about the legal issues, as I believe the concept of a ringworld actually originated with Niven, who based it on a sort of budget Dyson Sphere.
Makes you wonder where Halo came from.
 
Isn't Halo rings-around-planets (I don't really know much about it)? That's probably different enough not to be an issue. And Iain M. Banks had orbitals which were just rings-in-space, which sort of work like a ringworld but on a much smaller scale.
 
Isn't Halo rings-around-planets (I don't really know much about it)? That's probably different enough not to be an issue. And Iain M. Banks had orbitals which were just rings-in-space, which sort of work like a ringworld but on a much smaller scale.
Yeah, the concept of a planetary scale ring with a habitable inner surface was set loose into the wild when Ringworld came out.
 
Chaosium did a Ringworld game back in the 80s, it is probably unobtanium now but you never know. It was a BRP variant so assuming that game was any good I don't see why Legend wouldn


I like the Ringworld game enough that it got me to read the series by Larry Niven, which wasn’t as awesome as I expected given the really cool RPG. Only played it a few times and my copy is lost to one of many underfunded moves
 
I guess I should have been more clear. I own the Ringworld RPG and I'd like to know how easy it is to transfer the various race/weapons stats to Legends.

I'm thinking I'd use those to potentially do a Justifiers BRP type game.
 
I guess I should have been more clear. I own the Ringworld RPG and I'd like to know how easy it is to transfer the various race/weapons stats to Legends.

I'm thinking I'd use those to potentially do a Justifiers BRP type game.

That should be pretty simple, most of the changes would be an issue at all.


Scooped by Vile. :tongue:
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top