Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

Painted into a corner, indeed.

The game, YOUR game, is what you made it. What you wanted it to be. If you are content, then so be it. The rest of us can dissect it, expand it, and argue until we're blue in the face, but if in your mind it's a finished product as it stands now, there isn't much else to be said is there?

You're happy in your corner and like the paint, so all is good.

Hello,
sorry for being late to the party.
Once I added my voice to those asking for an "Advanced Fantasy".
Over the years I've changed my mind, BFRPG has a very precise identity: one that is at the same time modular and well defined. I think that crystallizing BFRPG in AFRPG (or compiling its Unearthed Arcana) would betray both its clear B/X roots and its open DIY approach.

As for reorganizing things in the downloads section... Well that kind of makes sense.
In light of what I wrote above, I've come to the conclusion that if you exclude the Core rules, the Field Guide, GM and Player Aids, Sheets and the Adventure modules, everything else should probably go to the Showcase.
But I can also see that would be kind of a nightmare job for Solomoriah.

artikid wrote:Hello,
sorry for being late to the party.
Once I added my voice to those asking for an "Advanced Fantasy".
Over the years I've changed my mind, BFRPG has a very precise identity: one that is at the same time modular and well defined. I think that crystallizing BFRPG in AFRPG (or compiling its Unearthed Arcana) would betray both its clear B/X roots and its open DIY approach.

Same here. I once also campaigned for an "Advanced Fantasy", especially to settle ranger and barbarian, but after several of these repeated threads requesting one, I have long since changed my mind on this. Certainly for the various reason explained above, but also because one of the biggest attractions of BFRPG is the ability to add content to the Showcase and/or to the workshop section with grand hopes for the Downloads page. Maybe an "Advanced Fantasy" in print wouldn't diminish that side feature of BFRPG but it would be a sad thing if it did.

What appears on the Downloads page now in terms of supplements are the ones I consider "best." This is very subjective, I know, but someone has to decide.

I may work on the navigation at some point; for right now, things are unlikely to change much on that front.

For the time being I'm glad to see no restructure in progress. If it's going to happen I might as well wait before I start writing blog guides to the existing literature.

My first post on rangers (drafted) is trying to cover a range of issues:

- Why there are different ranger class options here
- Difference between base, sub and quasi-class
- Various weapons specialization options are for true fighters only
- Tracking as a percentile skill and the potential use of pernectile skills for thief, bard ranger and assassin
- Different types of skill systems (percentile, d20 ability rolls, or x in 6)
- Types of background skills for 'woodcraft'
- Existing guides to wilderness encounters

Can anyone think of any more issues that might be discussed in this way regarding rangers?

If the post works out I might write something on how to make a magic-user and give a guided tour of all the various class / spell / cantrip options in the same sort of way.

Longman wrote: Can anyone think of any more issues that might be discussed in this way regarding rangers?

Animal companions and class-specific spells have been a fixture of the ranger class in the more recent iterations of the original game. Maybe worth discussing?

Thanks. I'd neglected that because there's no mention in any of the cuurent supplements that deal with a ranger about either an animal friend, or spells.

For me ranger spells are not part of the old school but mnaybe something about how to deal with animal companions might be in order.

Longman wrote: My first post on rangers (drafted) is trying to cover a range of issues:

Sounds like a great article - I look forward to it, and others to follow in the same vein. Even without active links to the material you discuss, it sounds like these will be interesting and informative.

Longman wrote:For the time being I'm glad to see no restructure in progress. If it's going to happen I might as well wait before I start writing blog guides to the existing literature.

A "restructure" is not planned. I may add to the navigation somewhat, but I do not foresee significant changes at this point.

The blog post on Rangers is up.

Hopefully this style of writing vill be useful to new players.