BRP Issues List

[damned]

I would think that the vanilla BRP would be the best way to go and if people really need another variant they would need to build an extension.
Or as someone mentioned earlier... in this thread or elsewhere... there is legend...

Thats great that you have basic tables functionality.
If you get time and you are curious you could try and see if you can incorporate the more complete tables as an extension....

[RosenMcStern]

Ideally it would be nice to have the option to use whichever flavour of RQ/BRP rules you prefer (I'm sure a lot of people would like to see RQ6), but perhaps this is more hassle than it's worth, maybe vanilla BRP is the best generic middle-ground.

I stress it again - it is not a matter of technical issues only. BRP is a licensed ruleset, and is technically the property of Chaosium. Changing it into something that can natively emulate the d100 variant published by another game maker would not be a "best business practice". I doubt Chaosium would consent to that, so extensions that make BRP => RQ6 or BRP => OpenQuest will have to be fan-made materials. It might even happen that these extensions be banned from hosting here on fantasygrounds.com - I suspect it would be Chaosium's right to ask for this, even though I doubt Charlie would actually ever issue such a ban.

The proper way to go would be to have two separate baselines, one OGL-ed for use by anyone (it could be made out of OpenQuest or Legend) and another one that reflects the original BRP ruleset and its functionalities. I see cross-pollination as "legally unadvisable". A lot of work, but probably necessary.

[Shaun]

I stress it again - it is not a matter of technical issues only. BRP is a licensed ruleset, and is technically the property of Chaosium. Changing it into something that can natively emulate the d100 variant published by another game maker would not be a "best business practice". I doubt Chaosium would consent to that, so extensions that make BRP => RQ6 or BRP => OpenQuest will have to be fan-made materials. It might even happen that these extensions be banned from hosting here on fantasygrounds.com - I suspect it would be Chaosium's right to ask for this, even though I doubt Charlie would actually ever issue such a ban.

The proper way to go would be to have two separate baselines, one OGL-ed for use by anyone (it could be made out of OpenQuest or Legend) and another one that reflects the original BRP ruleset and its functionalities. I see cross-pollination as "legally unadvisable". A lot of work, but probably necessary.

Hence my earlier suggestion that it might be worth considering using Legend as the basis for the ruleset, thereby avoiding licensing issues and presumably halving the retail price. Other iterations of d100 could then be incorporated by a generic extension like the current MyQuest.ext. So long as the modifications to use a proprietary rule system is done by the individual GM for a system they legitimately own, there's no legal problem.

Just throwing suggestions into the pot anyway, since this is the stage at which anybody tackling the rewrite of the ruleset will need to make some far-reaching decisions....

[Shaun]

If you get time and you are curious you could try and see if you can incorporate the more complete tables as an extension....

Curiousity I have an abundance of, time not so much unfortunately, and after taking a look inside these rulesets, it looks pretty daunting to unravel what's going on. I have zero knowledge of Lua, and the way FG & CoreRPG has been put together doesn't seem particularly clearly documented for a beginner to get to grips with. Possibly it's best left to those who already have the expertise to do the job (although if anybody can point me in the direction of some sort of reference document explaining what component file does what I'm curious enough to investigate further). I think RosenMcStern is right that the tables in CoreRPG can't simply be lifted out of there and transplanted into BRP, CoreRPG seems to implement everything very differently to the earlier BRP ruleset, and the ability to make these tables must depend on functions buried deep in the CoreRPG ruleset hence won't work in BRP (if you create a table in CoreRPG and export it as a module all you seem to get is the formatting of the table and its contents, not anything that actaually makes it work)

[Trenloe]

although if anybody can point me in the direction of some sort of reference document explaining what component file does what I'm curious enough to investigate further.

Info on the CoreRPG ruleset file locations and modifying a ruleset: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...oreRPG-ruleset

Some eveloper info in the Wiki too: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/wiki/...veloper_Guides

Start here - has good baseline info and links to XML and LUA reference material: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/modguide/

This is a little old, but still has very valid info, just not relative to later ruleset layouts: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/filel..._a_Ruleset.pdf

And for base API reference: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/refdoc/

[Shaun]

Info on the CoreRPG ruleset file locations and modifying a ruleset: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...oreRPG-ruleset

Thanks for these, it all looks pretty daunting to the newcomer, but if I get the time to put into it learning how to do this stuff it might well be interesting. Have got a copy of "Programming in Lua" as a starting point

[Shaun]

A few more thoughts and suggestions:

Broken or non-existent stuff in current ruleset:

• “+1/2 of damage bonus” for NPCs doesn’t work (adds +1 point instead) – seems to work fine for PCs though
• Missile hit location tables don’t appear in combat tracker for NPCs
• Although you can rename and delete characteristics in the MyQuest extension, if you do so it can screw up the workings of the ruleset, presumably because the characteristics are still referred to by their original names elsewhere (EG: if I delete EDU or rename POW, skill bonuses don’t work on the character sheet despite changing all references to them in MyQuest)

stuff previously mentioned:

• hit locations info disappears when you select “Race” in NPC template, making it impossible to define a race template with default AP
• hit locations disappear entirely from combat tracker if you select “custom” hit locations in NPC profile after selecting “race”
• NPC damage bonus (possibly) intermittently not working

desirable features for a version of new ruleset

• ability to turn off hit locations for NPCs and use general HP instead while still using hit locations for PCs (and selected NPCs if possible)
• ability to rename or remove characteristics without causing problems to the ruleset
• better indexing of rulebook with easily accessible links to most often used sections and tables
• auto-rolling tables
• alternative default desktop/skins
• easy to customise extension (like MyQuest.ext)
• More detail/features needed in Strike Rank info in Combat Tracker – Currently the Strike Rank field in Combat Tracker only displays characters Strike Rank modifier, doesn’t include weapon SR, making it necessary to add each individuals weapon SR manually, which makes the automatic calculation of this field a bit pointless, it needs to at least be possible to specify a default main weapon to be included in the calculation. If only the characters Dex & Siz modifiers are to be calculated, it would make more sense to include this as a field on the character sheet along with damage bonus, etc. Ideally, the weapon field in the Combat Tracker should be able to accommodate a couple of weapons which can be selected as the weapon currently in use, and then automatically add the weapons Strike Rank to the calculated field

[Claus]

Are any one working on integrating targeting between maps and combat tacker - like the functionality, there are in some of the other rule sets?

[KPhan2121]

Here are some things I've noticed
- The ability to export and import characters is not available
- Weapon and Martial Arts skills don't save to character sheets after you close the sheet
- You can't resize any of the windows, so it's difficult to use grid-based combat, the armor page is cut off around where modern armors are
- There isn't an option to use variable armor values
- You can change NPC initiative but not PC
- The way Initiative works in the rule set should be reworked, since everyone can take an action every 5 initiative.
- Some automation with the combat like the cumulative -30% penalty to defense rolls.
- The ability to add character portraits to PC Sheets

[Blackfoot]

I believe adding character portraits has always been a Player Only feature in BRP... (a long standing complaint of mine)