Quote from: sureshot;1011815I think Call of Cthulhu insanity system while true to Lovecraft books  also did not help in that regard. One or two bad sanity rolls and the character is nuttier than a peanut butter factory. Which for many was not fun. Going through the trouble of making a character only to have him be useless because of a bad save roll while true to the books did not translate to making players fans of the system.

That's the kind of nonsense you only hear from people who have never played CoC or from people who are trying to make the game sound more hardcore than it is in a sad belief that it will make them seem badass for playing. Losing sanity in CoC is actually a pretty slow decline.

That aside, given the long-lasting popularity of Call of Cthulhu, more than any other BRP game over decades, saying that CoC is the thing keeping BRP down is quite a claim. It is the game that has consistently kept the system in print.

QuoteWe live in the real world. We play rpgs to escape it

Oh. Sorry. I didn't realize you spoke collectively for everyone. Thanks for letting us know what we think. I'd been under the impression that there were a lot of differing tastes out there.

QuoteChaosium long years of mismanagement and missed opportunities they sat back on their collective behinds and imo did nothing to really try and get interest in their properties.

I'll agree with this. Chaosium completely managed to damage RQ enormously with the third edition in a number of ways. They largely went dormant in the mid-90s with Call of Cthulhu leaving Pagan Publishing to keep the game alive. The most recent edition of CoC with its Kickstarter. Dividing the fanbase again with ending RQ6. Chaosium has often been BRP's worst enemy.

Quote from: Baulderstone;1011834Oh. Sorry. I didn't realize you spoke collectively for everyone. Thanks for letting us know what we think. I'd been under the impression that there were a lot of differing tastes out there.

This is a discussion about why X isn't more popular. The premise of the thread has inherent in it that we are pontificating on what we think the overall mindset of a collective of people who we are only one example of and why they are making the decisions they are. If you disagree that we play rpgs to escape the real world we live in, that's a perfectly reasonable thing to dispute, but Sureshot is doing nothing out of the ordinary or appropriate for the thread premise.

Quote from: Thanos;1011697It just seems perfect. I will be upfront, I hated levels and alignments since 1977.  So anything that is classless and absent levels is great. Static hit points. Skills that only go up based on use. It seems pretty adaptable. Why isn't it more wide spread?

D20s aren't used. Skills (WTF!)? No cool classes. BRP is better run as a computer game than run manually on paper.

And D&D was first.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1011811Bingo.  Or perhaps more to the point, don't particularly mind them if they are in a game they otherwise enjoy.  I suspect most people have no preference on the question.  As an anecdote, my current gaming groups have around 15 different people in them.  There is one other person besides me that even has any demonstrated preference, even though most have played both.  I'm the only one that even lurks on gaming boards.  If I'm writing a game, it probably doesn't have classes, levels, or inflating hit points in it, because of my aesthetic preferences in design.  But I'm happy to run a game that has them, if it gets the job done.  The last time we considered running a BRP game (MRQ II), we didn't because it was too much of a particular type of work that I wasn't prepared to do at that time.

Quoted for everlovin' motherfuckin' truth.  Most people just don't care.

I would say branding is a big part of the answer.  When I play any RPG, to the rest of the world I'm "playing D&D."  Also Dungeons & Dragons is a good name, "BRPs" "MERPs" and "GURPS" kinda suck.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1011707A fair question. I think if you take it in the narrow way you asked it (i.e., about the BRP system, rather than the various BRP family of games) there is a good answer: They landed in a kind of uncanny valley between a truly generic system (like GURPS) and a distinctive, flavorful, but setting specific system (like Runequest, Pendragon or Ars Magica). The end result doesn't really satisfy people looking for either thing, and so it can't compete in the crowded marketplace of hundreds and hundreds of published game systems we have to chose from.

I think the greatest structural weakness of BRP is its magic system, which is basically lifted from spirit magic for Runequest, with almost no growth in the spell list over decades. Runequest spirit magic is great for Runequest, but provides a very narrow view of what magic can be in a fantasy system. It is pretty frustrating to try running a fantasy world with medieval alchemists or necromancers or some other juicy magical archetype and find your spell list doesn't really support anything beyond bumping up the damage for a mace, etc.

I played in a RuneQuest  campaign in the Nineties that used the magic system from my Glory Road Roleplay game, along with Glorianthan rune magic. They seemed to fit pretty well together. I told the GM that the GRR spells would be too powerful for the system and setting but it didn't work out that way. From what I remember, he did edit the spell lists a bit. The spells are available as pay what you want, meaning free, on DrivethruRPG.

Quote from: Baulderstone;1011834That aside, given the long-lasting popularity of Call of Cthulhu, more than any other BRP game over decades, saying that CoC is the thing keeping BRP down is quite a claim. It is the game that has consistently kept the system in print.

Learn to read. I never said the entire set of rules of COC is what keeps people away from playing BRP. It's the sanity system. Many people don't want to run the risk of losing a character to insanity.  Even if it is a slow process. I think it's a bad assumption on their part and it seems to have colored some in the hobby opinion of the rpg and BRP to some extent. For many their introduction to BRP was through COC> I don't personally agree with it. I can respect it. Not everyone has the same tastes I do in rpgs and that's not a bad thing.

Quote from: Baulderstone;1011834Oh. Sorry. I didn't realize you spoke collectively for everyone. Thanks for letting us know what we think. I'd been under the impression that there were a lot of differing tastes out there.

Oh. Sorry. I did not realize I needed to spell everything out on a large sheet of paper in wax crayon. I never said I spoke for everyone.

It's a thread about people opinions on why they think BRP is not more popular. Read the title of the thread next time before acting like a rpg gamer stereotype and lashing out at those who dare to criticize your beloved rpg.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1011837This is a discussion about why X isn't more popular. The premise of the thread has inherent in it that we are pontificating on what we think the overall mindset of a collective of people who we are only one example of and why they are making the decisions they are. If you disagree that we play rpgs to escape the real world we live in, that's a perfectly reasonable thing to dispute, but Sureshot is doing nothing out of the ordinary or appropriate for the thread premise.

Tell me about. Then again I'm used to it. It comes with the hobby. It's OK to critique a person rpg or company when they don't like either or. Don't you dare critique the rpg or company if they like it. It's rpg gamer hypocrisy at it's finest. I admit to having behaved that way myself. I freely admit to being mistaken at first on how insanity works.

Two other things which have hurt BRP and this is only my opinion

Just in case some think I'm speaking for everyone in the hobby.

Rpg gamers are notoriously cheap and afraid of change. They usually want to play a rpg they are both familiar and comfortable with. Any rpgs outside of that comfort zone tend to get ignored. As well they expect to buy tomorrow gaming today at yesterday prices. "what do you mean core rpg book XYZ cost more than 40$+. I remember buying the same book back in 1988 for 25-30$". So while they maybe more than willing to learn BRP they won't pay to do so.

For better or worse D&D and to a certain extent World of Darkness games have a huge brand recognition. More often than not one can find someone in the hobby having played one or the other or both. CoC not as often and they usually associate BRP with COC. That is purely my anecdotal experience.

truth, i think that there are a lot of little factors. I think the big one has been the... um... uneven management of the brand. If any of the factors are not little, it's that one. It's done very little to adapt the game, to change the message, to alter the image. I mean, I love the damn thing, but even the new version of runequest is staying with the iconic cover image with very little actual change - at least the mythras one changed the facing, the weapon, the monster type (though not the intent) and the lighting. This leaves it with a very grognard sort of feel to it, and a lack of excitement for folks.

then there are all of the little factors like a lack of pre-done archetypes (i.e. classes), all of the skills, poor communication of what impact improvement does (i.e. leveling), and so on.

and, lets face it, generic systems just don't do as well.

Quote from: Raleel;1011888and, lets face it, generic systems just don't do as well.

I feel like both GURPS and Champions/HERO System had their moment in the sun, just one that ended last century.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1011770What are the major differences between Magic World vs. RQ 2e?

Also, what's the major differences between Magic World and OpenQuest?




Agreed. I love Stormbringer (3rd by Ken St. Andre, Games Workshop hardcover), but even there I've had players complain about the low skill numbers.

But even RQ2 had the option for a pre-game experience to ramp up skills. AKA, the class that wasn't a class.  

However, I think the big problem with BRP is the slow combat and the squishy-ness of even experienced PCs.

I have not played RuneQuest or OpenQuest but from my understanding RuneQuest uses hit locations, strike ranks and opposed rolls while Magic World uses general hit points (with a major wounds table for criticial hits), dex initiative and the resistance table.  Magic World is based on Stormbringer 5.0 with a few BRPisms thrown in. A review of Magic World can be found here -> https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/16/16300.phtml

Quote from: Bren;1011708One reason BRP seems a lot less widespread than D&D is because Runequest, Basic Role -Playing,  Call of Cthulhu, Stormbringer, Worlds of Wonder (including Superworld and Magic World), Elfquest, Hawkmoon, Ringworld are each labeled as a different game though they share very, very similar systems whereas the many iterations of D&D, some of which are not very similar to some other version, are all labeled Dungeons & Dragons.

You forgot King Arthur Pendragon from the list.

Also if you want to go 3PP, OpenQuest,Myhtras, Rennaisance, Clockwork & Civalry, Pirates & Dragons, just to add a few more.

Quote from: Madprofessor;1011858I would say branding is a big part of the answer.  When I play any RPG, to the rest of the world I'm "playing D&D."  Also Dungeons & Dragons is a good name, "BRPs" "MERPs" and "GURPS" kinda suck.

Nailed it. No matter what RPG I am running or playing my explanations to non-gamers go nowhere until I say the magic words, "it's like D&D" then the light goes on.

D&D is generic for RPG, in the same way that "Band-aid" is for "adhesive bandage", "Kleenex" is for "disposable paper tissue", and "Kool-aid" is for "highly sweetened flavoured drink mix".  Product quality does't even enter into it. It's brand name recognition.

Quote from: sureshot;1011867Learn to read. I never said the entire set of rules of COC is what keeps people away from playing BRP. It's the sanity system. Many people don't want to run the risk of losing a character to insanity.  Even if it is a slow process. I think it's a bad assumption on their part and it seems to have colored some in the hobby opinion of the rpg and BRP to some extent. For many their introduction to BRP was through COC> I don't personally agree with it. I can respect it. Not everyone has the same tastes I do in rpgs and that's not a bad thing.

For my player group the possibility of having a character go insane is one of the biggest draws of CoC!!

I am pretty sure Chaosium has been trying to make BRP more generic in recent years. They released a BRP rulebook a while ago and many of the generic BRP sourcebooks are recycling mechanics from the brand name games. Not to mention the half-dozen or so d100 clones. There are almost a thousand products on OneBookShelf labeled as compatible with BRP.

Quote from: K Peterson;957383Dig around BRPCentral and you'll find some lists and 'family trees' that show an 'evolutionary' path of which product spawned which product, as well as edition timelines. Here are a couple of links: RQ Geneaology, BRP Family Tree

Why hasn't Chaosium instituted some kind of d100 license or something? Do we really gain something from dozens of rulebooks duplicating the same rules?