PDA

View Full Version : Update for BRP?



S Ferguson
February 18th, 2013, 18:47
Just wondering if, whomever works on these rules, was planning on updating them for Release 2.9.2? A lot more could be done to bring it up to par with the other systems out there (e.g. the extended radial icon). In fact players could probably start a wish list! :D

wbcreighton
February 19th, 2013, 23:08
I take it from your smiley that you saw the wishlist here: http://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17495

I don't think anyone is actively working on this ruleset. There have been a few people who have expressed interest but I'm sure RL has gotten in the way. I think the other problem is that there are quite a few d100 variations (Legend, RQ2 thru RQ6, OQ etc) now, it is unclear which one would be best to develop.

The original programmer for this ruleset doesn't work on it anymore. I know there are a few little bugs with BRP, and it would be nice to get those ironed out, but it is going to take a community effort. I wish I knew something about the programming and could help out.

S Ferguson
February 19th, 2013, 23:22
The flexibiity of the system, allows you to access Glorantha 2e RQ2e Stormbringer, Superpowers or whatnot. I was more curious about fixing the "dated" features, The radial menus, and the general interface to the program. I've heard that Chaosium expunged pretty much all of their games save for CoC. And the last expansion for it was Rome: Life and Death of the Republic in 2011. I assume they still hold the copyright on the system (otherwise this wouldn't have come up) but if no-one is willing to take up the mantle, I will. I can't guarantee it will be fast, but I *can* guarantee it will get done. Eventually.:)

wbcreighton
February 19th, 2013, 23:58
Chaosium is in the process of wrapping up Magic World and Advanced Sorcery so they haven't given up on it, but they tend to be on the slow side :D

http://basicroleplaying.com/magic-world/any-news-magic-world-advanced-sorcery-3182/

RosenMcStern
February 24th, 2013, 13:28
And the last expansion for it was Rome: Life and Death of the Republic in 2011.

I had more expansions planned in 2012, but I had to give priority to print/PDF products.

As for updates and such, I would do it myself but the financial result is not remunerative if compared on working on a product in classic format. Time is a constraint, and you have to prioritize what yields the best results. Which is a pity, as I had better expectations for FG-released products.

S Ferguson
February 24th, 2013, 17:16
I understand completely; I myself have to priotize work and "fun."Well now that Magic Worlds is out, perhaps more people will step up to the plate.

Sunspoticus
January 1st, 2014, 18:52
Step up to the plate? If its that or its abandonware, I'll put my name into the hat...

wbcreighton
January 1st, 2014, 19:29
Step up to the plate? If its that or its abandonware, I'll put my name into the hat...

Excellent, there wasn't much point until FG 3 was released.

phantomwhale
January 2nd, 2014, 13:54
Indeed - I did contemplate "stepping up to the plate" last year, but given Smiteworks have worked hard to FG3, and the new "core" ruleset to extend from, it seemed pointless to reinvent the wheel.

Can't see myself having time to do the development early 2014 however, but as a BRP ruleset owner, I'd be very happy to see an updated version.

Sunspoticus
January 2nd, 2014, 14:06
Indeed - I did contemplate "stepping up to the plate" last year, but given Smiteworks have worked hard to FG3, and the new "core" ruleset to extend from, it seemed pointless to reinvent the wheel.

Can't see myself having time to do the development early 2014 however, but as a BRP ruleset owner, I'd be very happy to see an updated version.

I've already been attempting to make some changes/adds to the ruleset. Here's some of my goals:

1. Add sizable window support. Not being to resize windows (including Chat) is a pain
2. Fix the Image Viewer -- its a fixed dimension and makes images look really wonky when viewed.
3. And probably the hardest, give the players BACK the ability to open/close shared images at will.

As far as the "Core" ruleset goes, I'm not convinced its the way to go (given that I've seen zero documentation on it)

Trenloe
January 2nd, 2014, 14:13
As far as the "Core" ruleset goes, I'm not convinced its the way to go (given that I've seen zero documentation on it)
It's definitely the way to go in the long run (use CoreRPG) - a lot of the stuff that is "missing" from BRP is functionality that came in after it was developed. Basing any ruleset on CoreRPG will help to avoid that in future, but without documentation it is a very steep learning curve.

As this is a commercial ruleset I'd recommend getting in touch with Smiteworks if you're interested in assisting in formally updating the ruleset. Otherwise, the update will just be for you unless you release it as an extension and don't include copyright material.

Sunspoticus
January 2nd, 2014, 16:17
Haven't noticed any show-stoppers with the ruleset when it comes to game itself. My problems with the BRP ruleset are because I'm coming over from the Savage Worlds ruleset (as you know) and have become spoiled by its features.

I understand the "Core" RPG ruleset is supposed to be the wave of the FG future but without any kind of documentation its just a bunch of tribal knowledge that only a select few can exploit. Thats your "curve"

Only actual ruleset data I've altered is whats required for my own campaign initiatives. Would love to help out in official capacity but I'm not part of the tribe, so I'll be off in my own lil corner eatin' some worms. LOL!

Moon Wizard
January 2nd, 2014, 21:04
There's no specific set of people that are the masters of ruleset development on FG. Our ruleset developers typically wax and wane as their time and interest permits. Even though I work on all the pieces (and drive development), I still don't think I'm the oldest active ruleset developer on the forums.

Documenting the process of ruleset development completely is a massive undertaking, which is part of the challenge. I'm already pushing the limit on what I can provide to keep FG active and growing. (Fix bugs, implement features, write documentation, provide support, ...) There was another thread started on the forums about a community effort to pool knowledge on this, in order to accomplish more than what I can do by myself.

If you are interested in working on the BRP ruleset, or bringing it over to layer on the CoreRPG framework; you can send a note to us at [email protected] . Doug handles our developer relations, and can coordinate with Stuart (if needed). Then, I can help with the actual ruleset work.

I do have some general thoughts on building on top of the CoreRPG. They are mainly revolving around starting from CoreRPG and adding in game specific elements (character sheets, NPC sheets, item sheets, combat tracker) that can be pulled from the original ruleset. Also, I have upped the reuse of components dramatically within all the migrated rulesets, in order to allow easier maintenance of the rulesets. I do plan on adding documentation in the long run, but getting v3.0.x settled is a priority right now.

Regards,
JPG

phantomwhale
January 4th, 2014, 12:50
Haven't noticed any show-stoppers with the ruleset when it comes to game itself. My problems with the BRP ruleset are because I'm coming over from the Savage Worlds ruleset (as you know) and have become spoiled by its features.

I understand the "Core" RPG ruleset is supposed to be the wave of the FG future but without any kind of documentation its just a bunch of tribal knowledge that only a select few can exploit. Thats your "curve"

Of course, none of the rulesets are well documented for extension. That was the state when I took on Savage Worlds development, and all of the added features I bought over from 4E involved having to read chunks of the 4E ruleset, understand them, and then work out how to port them into the Savage Worlds codebase.

Over time, this has eaten up more and more of my development time, to the point that I'm probably up to 80% of my limited time trying to "keep up". It was only when a second developer (Ikael) joined in to add some new features as well that we started getting new SW-specific features again, although the bug testing and integration was a bit of a grind.

My choice for the new year is to keep doing this, or spend the time moving SavageWorlds on top of the CoreRPG framework (like, I believe 4E currently is). In the long term, as Trenloe said, this has got to be the way forward. Over a year of just keeping Savage Worlds "current" takes it's toll - at the end of the day, the only way for FGII rulesets to grow and evolve together is going to be from a common base, so that efforts on the core ruleset are shared by all updated rulesets.

That said, it's a bigger effort in the short-term to get there, and having come to a documentation-less ruleset once to get up to speed with it, it's not something I'm going to take on lightly. So whilst I agree that rebuilding ANY ruleset on top of CoreRPG is the only way forward commercially, it might be that your time and efforts only allow a more modest improvement, such as an extension to the existing ruleset that adds in the few features you need (which could potentially be shared) such as Ikael did for SavageWorlds, although this by it's nature will be require more support over the years to remain working. The quickest approach is to hack the ruleset directly, but that means your work will be unable to be shared with anyone else.

At the end of the day though, it's your choice with where you are placed in spare time and confidence. That said, whilst documentation would be a nice to have, there is a very active forum here, esp. in the workshop category, which helped me through a number of really thorny spots as I resurrected and maintained SavageWorlds over the years. No inner circles here, just a bunch of very keen, committed users.