Contra wrote:The Core rules for Basic Fantasy RPG(2nd Edition) are adequate, but they seem to lack major sections that could be described better for players new to the pen and paper RPG concept.
BFRPG has many contributors, but ultimately the decisions as to what to include or exclude are mine. I am curious what you think is missing... see below for my commentary point-by-point.
Contra wrote:Though the creators of the Core Rules have the idea of a simple and easy to use rule set, and nearly every section has at least several paragraphs of suggestions for the Game Master, I might suggest removing such suggestions, or at least decreasing the size.
Not happening. The suggestions in the rules are entirely my work, and are intended to help beginners use the rules. Removing them is not an option.
Contra wrote:As it seems, some of the ideas that are introduced to new players, such as creating a castle are more heavily focused on, compared to Saving throws.(pages: 52 to 53 are about saving throws, a major part of any game, compared to pages 149(the FULL page) to 151, are about Strongholds, a portion of the game that only higher level characters may need, but still focused on more than saving throws.)
These are true statements. I'll agree that the information presented for saving throws might be a bit skimpy; however, the Strongholds section was written almost entirely by Nick Bogan. Without his work, the game might still be lacking such rules. If this is one of the things you think should be removed, well, that's not happening. I'll not be gutting them at the suggestion of one individual.
Contra wrote:Another revision that may be suggested, is to state in full how to roll and use a saving throw, as it says on the bottom of page 52, "Like an attack roll, a saving throw is a d20 roll, with the target number based on the character's class and level;..."
The quote above, could be improved upon, such as "Like an attack roll, a saving throw is a d20 roll, with the target number being the roll that a saving throw must be equal to or higher than, based upon by the character's class and level. An example might be a level 1 fighter is targeted by a spell, and then must roll a 17 or higher to evade the spell."
First of all, let me suggest that you learn to avoid the passive voice. Don't say "Another revision that may be suggested," say "Another revision I would suggest." Passive voice is a terrible writing habit... makes you sound like you work for the government.
Your suggested alteration needs a bit of an edit. Probably it should read like this:
Like an attack roll, a saving throw is a d20 roll, with the target number being the roll that a saving throw must be equal to or higher than, based upon by the character's class and level. For example, a first level Fighter is targeted by a spell; if a saving throw is allowed by the spell, then the player must roll a 17 or higher to evade or resist it.
Contra wrote:One more revision that might be taken into consideration is how the Thief Abilities section, page 9 is explained.
While reading the different uses of each ability, any beginning player has no idea how to roll for a successful ability. A good explanation of Thief abilities might be something like the following, “To roll for a thief ability, the player must roll the number less than or equal to the required ability.” (Since that appears to be how the game works.) And if an example might be suggested, than you should use something along the following, “If a level 1 thief wishes to Open the Lock of a door, they are required to roll a 25 or lower to successfully open the lock.”
The above statement is just a suggestion.
Indeed, it's a bit awkward. I'll admit that you are not the first person to ask for more details about thief abilities; I just haven't written text that I like.
Contra wrote:Another revision that might be suggested is to put the saving throw chart for character classes in the same section as character creation.
Suggested before, and rejected. The layout order of the rules has a purpose. I do recommend that beginners use J.D. Jarvis' character sheets, as they have page numbers on them for everything needed when creating a character.
Contra wrote:But, I also have a suggestion for the Monsters Section, the Polar Bear, page 58, seems to have lower stats than a Cave Bear, page 57.
The Polar Bear’s damage is 1d6/1d6/1d10+2d8 hug, compared to the Cave Bear’s 1d8/1d8/2d6+2d8 hug.
Realistically speaking, the Polar Bear is the largest modern Bear, some reaching a length of 9.8 ft, and a weight of 1,4433 Lb, (
http://www.seaworld.org/animal-info/inf ... istics.htm)
I would change the XP value, the hit dice, and damage to fit the characteristics of the largest Carnivorous Land Mammal.
The Cave Bear in the BFRPG rules is the biggest bear there is, a prehistoric monster exceeding even the modern Polar Bear in power and ferocity. The stats are as they should be to reflect that.
Contra wrote:Thank you for reading these suggestions and revisions, I do like the simple rules, but they could still be improved upon in several ways.
I have no doubt the could be improved. Everything can be, assuming that you can determine what "improved" means.
The BFRPG rules have stood the test of time, having many players, GMs, and contributors. I'd recommend, before you start remodeling the house, you live in it a while first. Get used to it. If you still find it inadequate, well then, feel free to change it to suit yourself, in your own game. But the Core Rules serve not merely your needs and desires but also the needs and desires of many others, not all of whom will necessarily agree with you as to what "improved" means.
Now, let me say welcome. Dissenting opinions are always welcome here... just be prepared to back them up.