Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game

slimykuotoan · Post by **slimykuotoan** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:34 pm

http://www.basicfantasy.org/downloads.html

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:46 pm

slimykuotoan wrote:
http://www.basicfantasy.org/downloads.html

Yeah, I looked at that a couple of years ago when I was deciding between True20, C&C, this, Savage Worlds, and a couple of others for my new system of choice. It is pretty good.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:46 pm

Thanks. Have known of this ever since the project was started, but its cool to see it being discovered by others.

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:17 pm

I only found out about it a few weeks ago... It's nice to know that another 'old-school' attempt was being done and it sounds like a genuine attempt to make it legit using the OGL while avoiding certain legal 'gray areas'.

I looked through it... liked it... and thought that some things could be used with C&C. Another nice thing about it is the price -- it's free! You can choose to buy the books through Lulu, the costs of the books are minimal.

Unfortunately, Lulu tends to shaft potential Canadian customers due to limited shipping options and tends to send the stuff via UPS. For those of you who don't know, UPS adds on Brokerage charges which are owed on delivery and these can amount to a lot more than the shipping and, in some cases, the value of item being shipped.

At some point, I'll order it and have it send to a friend in the US who can then, in turn, bring up to Canada on their next visit or send it to me via regular post.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:42 pm

I followed Basicfantasy from near it's inception. I've even run 3 sessions of BF. While I like the idea, most of the implementation of old-school / new-school, and many of the ideas presented in that format, ultimately the game could be a bit better. Of course this is all personal opinion as certain mechanics I would do a bit differently. Regardless, for the game system and the price, you can't beat BF. It's pretty good.

........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:15 pm

Dude had an entirely different motive for creating that system than we did. But hey a 'fan' effort works for him. More power to him.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Stuie · Post by **Stuie** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:55 pm

Given the choice, I went with C&C.
_________________
Laudir Agus Mir

andakitty · Post by **andakitty** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:57 pm

I like it, and would probably use it in tandem with C&C. They are that similar. The same guy did something called Project 74, aternate rules systems for D&D type games. Like a skill system that has a way to make the thief abilities available to everyone as skills and keep the thief best at them. I like the 'to hit' scheme better and the lower hit points and a couple other things. C&C is better filled out, and the monster and spell sections are more complete and descriptive, and have a greater variety of just about everything. I guess if I ran this I would use a mix, 75% C&C, 25% BFRPG...or thereabouts. Before I make up my mind I want to see the CKG.

Philotomy Jurament · Post by **Philotomy Jurament** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:49 pm

I've run a few sessions of BFRPG. It's a nice system.

johns · Post by **johns** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:23 pm

I bought the book from Lulu, and use it to supplement my C&C game. I think it's great - everything you need in a slim volume.

Maliki · Post by **Maliki** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:03 pm

I looked at this as well, it does some things really well, but I'll stick to C&C.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

Fat Dragon Games · Post by **Fat Dragon Games** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:31 pm

Don't know if you guys have seen this but Labrynth Lord is an OSRIC style toolbox based very closely on the Moldvay Basic Set (not the BECMI sets):
http://www.goblinoidgames.com/labyrinthlord.htm
_________________
Thomas A. Tullis

Fat Dragon Games
www.fatdragongames.com

Castles & Crusades...more D&D than D&D.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:14 pm

Bunnies are fuzzy.*

*So are kitties.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 1:07 am

Fat Dragon Games wrote:
Don't know if you guys have seen this but Labrynth Lord is an OSRIC style toolbox based very closely on the Moldvay Basic Set (not the BECMI sets):
http://www.goblinoidgames.com/labyrinthlord.htm

Uh-huh... I have mixed feelings about this endeavor. That which should not be named now has a sibling which is operating on a similar philosophy. On top of that... GORE produced by them seems to be a version of Chaosium's BRP system. However, I do wish them all the best and grabbed the rulesets for comparison and possible use.

I'll give it this though... it (LL) does look sharp. I was underwhelmed when I checked out GORE.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Traveller · Post by **Traveller** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 12:39 am

Actually, I looked through BFRPG from its inception, and it has a far different design goal than the game that shall NEVER be named. BFRPG went the same route that C&C did, using the OGL to recreate a style/feel of game that was lost with d20 Fantasy. BFRPG though went about things in a different manner.

The game that shall NEVER be named functions on an entirely different premise, one that is at best on shaky footing. Unlike the game that shall NEVER be named, I'd support BFRPG.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

Post by **Breakdaddy** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 3:45 pm

At the risk of outing the game that shall never be named, what *IS* the game that shall never be named? OSRIC? That's my feeling, but in the absence of certainty, my brain is hurting.

P.S.- I really like Basic Fantasy. I bought the perfectbound from lulu and have mined it for ideas for C&C.

Traveller · Post by **Traveller** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 pm

Merely speaking the name of the game that shall NEVER be named is a thread locking offense. Suffice it to say that those that speak the name should refrain from doing so and focus on the original topic, the BFRPG.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 5:58 pm

Breakdaddy wrote:
At the risk of outing the game that shall never be named, what *IS* the game that shall never be named? OSRIC? That's my feeling, but in the absence of certainty, my brain is hurting.

P.S.- I really like Basic Fantasy. I bought the perfectbound from lulu and have mined it for ideas for C&C.

Yep, thats it. Still hasn't kept me from buying their modules and still feeling that "SHROOMS rule!!"

The police, FBI, and WOTC have still refrained from visiting me or sending me legal notices, and they have had two years now to do so. Considering how fast WOTC has jumped on other "infractions" I am pretty sure its legal, especially since the "core rules" are sold at cost rather than profit.

So no, I don't understand, but that is the way the Trolls want to treat it.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:49 pm

I think we need to get back on the subject at hand. This isn't going anywhere that will end well.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:53 pm

I like the concept behind BFRPG very well. I also understand why the creator did what he did when making it. It is an excellent example of making a house system out of vairous ideas.

In the end I stuck with C&C but was tempted to go with BFRPG at one point.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Philotomy Jurament · Post by **Philotomy Jurament** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:37 pm

I appreciate all the new old-school rules that have sprung up, including the one that isn't supposed to be named. And yeah, shrooms rule -- pod caverns is a great module.

BFRPG has an nice approach for handling ability rolls, IMO. Different from the SIEGE engine (e.g. primes aren't a factor), but still very workable.

There are new rules sets very similar to AD&D and Classic D&D; I wonder how long before one pops up for OD&D(1974)?
_________________
http://www.philotomy.com
Lost City Campaign Log

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 8:41 pm

Speaking of BFRPG, and how it is kind of modeled after Modvay D&D, I'm hoping Basic C&C sticks with SEIGE, but with a Mentzer flavor.

I know I'm biased, but Basic C&C could be the best basic form of fantasy roleplaying to hit the market.

..............................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 8:48 pm

Omote wrote:
Speaking of BFRPG, and how it is kind of modeled after Modvay D&D, I'm hoping Basic C&C sticks with SEIGE, but with a Mentzer flavor.

I know I'm biased, but Basic C&C could be the best basic form of fantasy roleplaying to hit the market.

..............................................Omote

FPQ

I already think C&C is the best, because it is so universally useable. I love the SIEGE engine so much that even when I read the old Moldvay and Mentzer sets, I think "thats a great idea/rules mechanic. It will be super easy to implement with the SIEGE engine." Thoughts of switching to the old rules mechanics quickly crosses my mind and doesn't even come close to "sticking".

Between the SIEGE engine and the fact that C&C makes all of my D&D books easily viable is hard for me to ignore, or contemplate using another system.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:08 pm

I've come across two lovely ladies who are contemplating getting into Fantasy RPGs. In my well stragegized conversations on this subject with them, I've come to learn that even the C&CPHB is a bit daunting for them to get into the game with. I think that they are taken back by the fact that this is a BOOK of rules to play a game. My theory is that for a basic C&C game, the box that it comes in subconsciously tells them a GAME rather then a big book of rules. Maybe this is true for others who are trying to get into the game, IDK. I do know in this particular senario, the C&CPHB is not screaming PLAY ME - PLAY ME.

Hey, look. I',m a damn charming individule, but to get two potential new players into C&C, it looks like it may take another approach. That's why I'm personally waiting for C&C basic. A slim box like game, that seems more like a game then a discertation on rules.

............................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:14 pm

Omote wrote:
I've come across two lovely ladies who are contemplating getting into Fantasy RPGs. In my well stragegized conversations on this subject with them, I've come to learn that even the C&CPHB is a bit daunting for them to get into the game with. I think that they are taken back by the fact that this is a BOOK of rules to play a game. My theory is that for a basic C&C game, the box that it comes in subconsciously tells them a GAME rather then a big book of rules. Maybe this is true for others who are trying to get into the game, IDK. I do know in this particular senario, the C&CPHB is not screaming PLAY ME - PLAY ME.

Hey, look. I',m a damn charming individule, but to get two potential new players into C&C, it looks like it may take another approach. That's why I'm personally waiting for C&C basic. A slim box like game, that seems more like a game then a discertation on rules.

............................................Omote

FPQ

Print out and hand them the Quickstart rules. Then show them how many pages are dedicated to spells, and that only spellcasters even have to worry about them, and even then just the 0 and 1st level spells. That should help cut it down to a size they are willing to try.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:32 pm

One of the reasons I'm taking my time in getting them to play is because, both of them have always considered D&D (C&C) a game for the boys. While they both agree that they are interested, they are not interested in the version of the game that we play most often (v3.5). They've mentioned that they have no interest in "learning how to play a game that uses all those books." This is when I began talking up C&C, and they both seemed interested. I showed them the book, and they both mentioned how complicated it seemed. I explained that this was an extremely comprehensive version of the rules. Plus, I've been talking up C&C for the past 3-4 months now to them. One of them is a fairly avid boardgamer, so that is another reason why the idea of a "box set" would go over well.

The C&C basic "pamphlet" rules might work better. But whatever I my decision, I think I'm going to have to pull the trigger and get them to play somewhat soon. Let's hope that is going to happen in the next couple of months.

........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Traveller · Post by **Traveller** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:55 pm

Introduce them to SHERPA if you must.
Omote, go with the quickstart rules and the monster download. If you need treasure, the "quick and dirty" list from the box set will work well. Or perhaps I can go and cut down the Monsters & Treasure treasure list to be more in line with the quickstart.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

Fat Dragon Games · Post by **Fat Dragon Games** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:00 pm

Omote wrote:
I've come across two lovely ladies who are contemplating getting into Fantasy RPGs. In my well stragegized conversations on this subject with them, I've come to learn that even the C&CPHB is a bit daunting for them to get into the game with. I think that they are taken back by the fact that this is a BOOK of rules to play a game. My theory is that for a basic C&C game, the box that it comes in subconsciously tells them a GAME rather then a big book of rules. Maybe this is true for others who are trying to get into the game, IDK. I do know in this particular senario, the C&CPHB is not screaming PLAY ME - PLAY ME.

............................................Omote

FPQ

Yep. I'm waiting for the basic set so I can start running a C&C game for some local kids. I really want them to have the experiece of an RPG in a box for their firt go at it (yes, I'm old, I still like RPGs that come in a box!)
_________________
Thomas A. Tullis

Fat Dragon Games
www.fatdragongames.com

Castles & Crusades...more D&D than D&D.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:11 pm

Traveller wrote:
Introduce them to SHERPA if you must.
Omote, go with the quickstart rules and the monster download. If you need treasure, the "quick and dirty" list from the box set will work well. Or perhaps I can go and cut down the Monsters & Treasure treasure list to be more in line with the quickstart.

Haha, SHERPA... wow. Kinda neat character sheet.
Anyways, to be honest, at this point I could pretty much run a game of C&C with ZERO materials. It seems though, with a good 'ol box set, it would seem more like a game ~ a fun romp of fantasy adventure. That's what will bring in the new players. I promise that.

Good luck to you Fat Dragon. I hope you get your box set soon.

...........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Post by **finarvyn** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:34 pm

Omote wrote:
One of the reasons I'm taking my time in getting them to play is because, both of them have always considered D&D (C&C) a game for the boys. While they both agree that they are interested, they are not interested in the version of the game that we play most often (v3.5). They've mentioned that they have no interest in "learning how to play a game that uses all those books."

This is a fantastic observation. Through my 31 years of playing RPGs I have had lots of girls play in my games. Not always a 50-50 mix, but not too far from it, either. My current group has 6 players, 3 of which are female.

A couple observations:

1. Most females seem to value roles over rules. In fact, the girls I have encountered get "turned off" to a game if they are presented with a lot of rules to figure out. (And we're talking about smart girls here -- physics, math, engineering, nurses...)

2. Most females seem to prefer fantasy over science fiction. (The exception here appears to be Star Wars; lots of girls like that setting just fine!)

3. Most females aren't into "wargaming" their way through an adventure. When the master strategist players start talking about how to tactically move their units around, the girls start to look bored.

4. Most females seem to like dragons and magic. While they are fine with an occasional Conan-like gritty S&S game, they seem to love best the High Fantasy scenarios.

Again, this is a limited sampling size of a dozen or so females so take my wisdom for what it's worth.....

Troll Lord Games

Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game

Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game

Re: Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game