[BFRPG] Core Rules

[Solomoriah]

I'll consider extending the description. As far as I remember, only d8's are used in the core rules for monster hit dice; when I wrote the text I wasn't sure that would remain true.

[Omote]

Page 105, Skeleton. The listing for Armor Class has a notation of (see below). The description really doesn't go into anything regarding the armor class notation. Perhaps the notation of (see below) should be moved to the hit dice row as the description talks about limiting hit point damage.

-O

[Solomoriah]

I'm leaving skeletons (and zombies, which have a reciprocal form of protection) as is; it's a defense thing, in my opinion.

[Omote]

Other then what I mentioned here, I really think the next release will be ready to go.

-O

[Solomoriah]

Assuming no flow errors creep into it.

That's what makes this whole mess so frustrating... people keep finding little things to change that we should have noticed months ago.

I'm generating the PDF for Release 75 right now. For those of you who went over the R74 document in such detail... I'm really, really sorry.

[Solomoriah]

Announcing!

Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game Core Rules
2nd Edition (Release 75)

This release clarifies monster hit dice and the Elven bonuses for detection of secret doors.

http://basicfantasy.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[kdladage]

Solo --- two things:

1. You have nothing what-so-ever to be sorry about.

2. I suggest (despite my own desire to see this thing in print sooner rather than later) that you maintain the initial "two weeks with no errors detected" schedule and just let this thing hit Lulu when it hits Lulu. Do not kick yourself later for having been too eager sooner.

[Omote]

There are no overflow errors in R75.

With the above corrections, I think this bad boy is ready to go to print. I'll give another pass through, but the last release looked good (again).

-O

[Nazim]

Solo --- two things:

1. You have nothing what-so-ever to be sorry about.

2. I suggest (despite my own desire to see this thing in print sooner rather than later) that you maintain the initial "two weeks with no errors detected" schedule and just let this thing hit Lulu when it hits Lulu. Do not kick yourself later for having been too eager sooner.

I agree with this sentiment.

BTW, I want to thank Omote for his relentless pursuit of errors in BFRPG. Your service benefits all of us.

[tagtkd]

I agree with Nazim!! Thanks for your hard work Omote.

I just went through R75 looking for any overflow error & the only thing I saw was pg "14" the number was partial cut off by the picture but I personally wouldn't worry about it unless there is a major error that would cause another release!!

Troy

[Solomoriah]

Hmm. I can redo just page 14 if I try hard enough; it would allow me to avoid flow errors in other parts...

[Omote]

I just went through R75 looking for any overflow error & the only thing I saw was pg "14"...

Wow, good spot on that one.

Thank you gents, for the kind words.

-O

[Omote]

The Open Game License may need to be updated to include Basic Fantasy Role-Playing Game 2nd edition. Though since the term 2nd edition is not part of the title of the project per se, it might not need to be updated. To be thurough, perhaps it should be. Just a thought.

-O

[Solomoriah]

No, I don't believe we need any changes. It's the same project. Calling it the "2nd Edition" just differentiates it from the original print edition.

[Omote]

With the exception of the page 14 overflow issue mentioned above, this bad-boy is good to go to print.

-O

[kdladage]

Agreed. This thing looks very very good.

But... that said, I would still wait a couple of weeks. It will not kill anyone to wait a little while, and it will give time to see things we could be glossing over due to the number of times we have all looked at this material now...

[Solomoriah]

I've posted an updated copy of the core rules, created as I described: I created a new PDF, cut it into pieces and extracted just the page numbered 14; then I cut apart the current PDF and slipped that new page in. The result is a larger PDF (I think my tools multiply the overhead part of the PDF when they cut it apart) but there should be no flow issues added this way.

Hopefully this is it. I'm going to try for an August 1st release, if nothing goes wrong now.

[wiseman207]

I'm anxiously awaiting the next print release, I must say that BFRPG is excellent.

One thing I think might make for a good rules consideration is more multiclass combinations. I know the F/T debate has been beaten to death, but I think the F/T has one merit... he might be at a lower level than a Thief and have weaker thief skills, but he also has the option of forgoing some of his thief ability and wearing heavy armor instead. In that sense, he can effectively choose whether to function as a Fighter or Thief. I'd also say that thief abilities of perception and manual skills (open locks, remove traps, etc) wouldn't be disabled by armor, maybe only sneaking and climbing walls or something.

Another question: who is it that's writing the Druid supplement? I have a love for druids and if they need help finishing it I'd consider stepping in.

[Solomoriah]

As noted in the "Dealing With Players" section, a GM can allow a thief to use heavy armor at the cost of his thief skills, including backstab. This makes the thief a poor excuse for a fighter; which, in my opinion, is the same thing as a fighter/thief but with more hit points on the average for a given number of XP.

Likewise for combining Fighter and Cleric, you just don't gain enough for the XP cost.

The exception to this rule would be if you have beefed up your Fighters with options from the Almanack; in those cases, multiclassing Fighter with something else might be reasonable. That doesn't belong in the Core Rules, however, but rather in the Almanack.

[wiseman207]

Ah, that bit about the armor slipped past me. Nevermind then.

Well, I think I might try to finish that Druid supplement, if only for my own use. I got nothin' better to do tonight.

[Solomoriah]

Have you looked at the Druid Spells thread?

http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewt ... 42&t=26076" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't think I have gotten all the stuff from the thread into the supplement. I'll try to get on it soon.

[Solomoriah]

Well, I just uploaded the cover art to Lulu.com, and discovered they have added a "bug" to the back cover, including the item number and their website. Gah. I'll have to put a small frame in the border area so it doesn't look like something that needs to be scraped off...

[Mak]

Hey everybody,

I haven't read or even skimmed all of release 75. I did, however, start from the beginning with the proofer's eye that I use when someone asks me to read their academic work. I haven't found any glaring problems. I am finding, though, very little things. Very little. Here's a sample:

page [pdf]	change	rationale
3 [7]	"An example character" to "A sample character"	"example" is not really an adjective
3 [7]	"i.e. melee or missile weapon" to "i.e., melee or missile weapon"	comma usually required after expressions such as i.e., e.g., that is, namely, etc.
5 [9]	"Elves are a slender race, with both genders" to "... with both sexes"	Gender refers to socially constructed notions of what it means to be male or female; sex refers to biological makeup and therefore to the physical characteristics of each sex.
5 [9]	"They have a typical lifespan of twelve centuries or more ..." : delete "typical".	Avoids repetition of "typical" in previous sentence; follows pattern in dwarf and halfling sections.
7 [11]	"they have the power to Turn the undead, that is,": use semicolon or long dash instead of comma after "undead" and before "that is,"	The part of the sentence preceding "that is" is already grammatically complete; needs something other than a comma to avoid becoming a run-on sentence.

As you can see, none of these are close to being a big deal. None of these things are going to cause confusion or lessen anyone's enjoyment of the core rules. One could certainly quibble about a few of them -- perhaps all of them. My sense is that this is the level of fine-tuning BFRPG is at right now. Which is good news! It seems to be at the point where technical and stylistic improvements are only going to come through someone -- Sol? an experienced editor? -- dedicating a lot of time to ensuring technical and stylistic consistency across the whole typescript, which is something that (as some have noted) is rare in RPG publishing, let alone the publishing industry as a whole.

I'll keep looking, but I feel a little silly mentioning these things. Again, I'd point them out to someone submitting an essay or thesis, but that's not what BFRPG is.

Thoughts?

[Solomoriah]

All the things you've pointed out are elements of my personal style...

[Hywaywolf]

Well, I just uploaded the cover art to Lulu.com, and discovered they have added a "bug" to the back cover, including the item number and their website. Gah. I'll have to put a small frame in the border area so it doesn't look like something that needs to be scraped off...

If it really looks like a bug, maybe you should add a tiny dwarf fighter next to it with axe raised like he is in melee with lulu .

[Mak]

All the things you've pointed out are elements of my personal style...

... and so are fine that way!

I did search the pdf for all instances of "i.e." and found that in 9 cases, the term is not followed by a comma, but in a tenth, it is (p. 39 [pdf 43], in the para. after "Becoming Lost"). So an editor might advise consistency and suggest either adding commas after all occurrences (as the Chicago Manual of Style recommends) or using no comma in any occurrence. But, obviously, this is a very, very, very minor issue.

[Omote]

But, obviously, this is a very, very, very minor issue.

Is this a minor issue?

Though, Mak does make a fine point in some of his above proposed edits. I'm not suggesting that these should be changed at all, as nobody is really going to read this document in said way. However, should these issues become more prominent in your design process, consider some of them.

-O

[Piper]

... as nobody is really going to read this document in said way.

You are mistaken.

I don't mean that as a challenge, but everyone reads a different way. Errors like the ones listed in the above post by Mak stand out to me when I read. I ignore them, but I can assure you they do not go unnoticed by everyone, as you assert in your post.

[Mak]

Just to be clear: I'm not actually advocating any changes at all. I guess I just wanted to make the point that it looks to me like proofreading the core rules text has reached a point of rapidly diminishing returns where only extremely fine points of style and usage remain on the table. Addressing any of these is likely to cause more headaches than it's worth. Plus, I'd much prefer a core rules text that reflects the author's personal style -- and that is already clear and concise to start with -- to one that aims to obey in every way the dictates of a style guide.

Put another way, I'm really pointing out the uselessness of the kinds of contributions I, personally, can make to the project at this point. What is to be gained by, say, ensuring consistent use of "i.e." across 150-plus pages of single-spaced text? Will it reduce the number of users who post questions about the rules? Will it earn BFRPG record sales at lulu? Will it garner Solomoriah a Pulitzer? (That would be nice! ...) No. So:

I'll keep reading the typescript. But so far it's looking really, really good.

[Omote]

... as nobody is really going to read this document in said way.

You are mistaken.

I don't mean that as a challenge, but everyone reads a different way. Errors like the ones listed in the above post by Mak stand out to me when I read. I ignore them, but I can assure you they do not go unnoticed by everyone, as you assert in your post.

I'm not sure everything pointed out by Mak is an error per se. I did not say that errors would go unnoticed. I was referring to the fact that most people who are reading this document are not looking for minor grammatical issues and writing style, but are looking to take in a game system. As a casual reader, if you are noticing the stylistic usage of commas and other like grammar issues, then you might be missing the point of the Basic Fantasy Role Playing Game.

-O