Topic: Optional 'Law' for using stat bonuses directly

[Trond]

Hi guys! I have always loved RM for its dangerous battles, great magic system and 'in-between' maneuver results.
However, one thing I have missed is a more direct way of using stats (or rather stat bonuses)  in situations where no skill is applicaple. I have devised a table for using stat bonuses versus difficulty levels to obtain a target number to roll against, (sorry, it looks a bit messy when uploaded to this forum). The table follows the following formula:
Target number=[(Stat bonus x 2) + 50] +/- difficulty lvl
(using the usual difficulty levels: hard= -10, medium = 0, Light=+10 etc )

Bonus             routine   easy    light     medium   hard     V hard    X hard    S.folly      absurd
+35                150       140    130      120        110         100        90          70            50
+30                140       130    120      110        100           90        80          60            40
+25                130       120    110      100          90           80        70          50            30
+20                120       110    100        90          80           70        60          40            20
+15                110       100      90        80          70           60        50          30            10
+10                100         90      80        70          60           50        40          20              0
+5                    90         80      70        60          50           40        30          10           -10
0                     80         70      60        50          40           30        20            0           -20
-5                    70         60     50         40          30           20        10        -10           -30
-10                  60         50     40          30         20           10          0        -20           -40
-15                  50         40     30         20          10            0        -10        -30           -50
-20                  40        30      20         10            0          -10       -20        -40           -60
-25                 30         20      10           0         -10          -20      -30        -50            -70


In other words, an average person (bonus=0), using a stat bonus at difficulty level 'medium' (+0) gets the target number 50 (50% chance of success). A bonus of 5 and difficulty of 'hard' also gives 50.
Why double the bonus in the formula? because a +20 character is much better than a +0, and should be almost guaranteed to succeed in most cases, whereas the +0 is average (50% in medium cases).

Here's what to do:
Apply the appropriate stat bonus and difficulty level to the table (or formula) to obtain the corresponding target number.  Roll 1d100 and add to the target number to see if the sum is equal to or above 100, if so: success. OR: apply the resulting sum to the ?General? section of the static action table (RMC 10-05 p.139).

Example: The trees of the Old Forest are lulling Frodo to sleep. To resist is a ?hard? action, but the (imaginary) GM tells his (imaginary) player that he can use his Self Discipline stat bonus of + 10 to resist. This gives the number 60 from the table above. Rolling a 36, he falls asleep, but only lightly (60+36=96 applied to RMC table 10-05 p.139).

For stat contests between individuals each ?contestant? can use the medium difficulty, find the number corresponding to the stat bonus in the table, and add 1d100. The one with the higher result wins.

Example: Catherine wants to guess what is on Torsten?s mind by talking to him and fishing out info. The GM decides that the Empathy stat bonus is most appropriate for the Catherines situation, while Torsten uses his Self Discipline. Catherine has Em +10 and Torsten has SD +5. Looking up under ?medium? (=0) in the formula above they obtain 70 and 60 respectively. Catherine rolls 56 and Torsten 61, to obtain 126 and 121 respectively. Catherine wins, but since the margin is small, the GM might want to give her only a small part of the info she wants.

I realize now that 'medium' in RM is often a bit more difficult than the average case, but remember that it?s harder to improve the stats than the skills. I may reformulate the formula slightly, but the basics will remain the same. What do you think?

[Trond]

An alternative and 'harder' table (but then, the world of Rolemaster is a hard world). This one is based on the assumption that the average Joe has 50% chance of succeeding at an 'easy' task and 30% at medium. Slightly less intuitive perhaps, but less likely to upset game balance. Remember that this is for use only when no skills apply.

Stat Bon      routine     easy       light    medium   hard   V hard   X hard   S.folly     absurd
+35            130         120        110        100        90        70       50          30          10
+30            120         110        100          90        80        60       40          20            0
+25            110         100          90          80        70        50       30          10         -10
+20            100           90          80          70        60        40       20            0         -20
+15              90           80          70          60        50        30       10         -10        -30
+10              80           70          60          50        40        20         0         -20        -40
+5                70           60          50          40        30        10      -10         -30        -50
 0                 60          50          40          30         20         0       -20        -40        -60
-5                 50          40          30          20         10      -10      -30         -50       -70
-10               40          30          20          10           0      -20      -40         -60       -80
-15               30          20          10            0        -10      -30      -50         -70        -90
-20               20          10            0         -10        -20      -40      -60         -80      -100
-25               10            0         -10         -20        -30      -50      -70         -90      -110

The table follows the formula [(Stat bonus x 2) + 30] +/- difficulty lvl

[Arioch]

Interesting idea, and a great way to start posting! 
Welcome to the forums!

[Trond]

Thanks! Let me know if you try it out!

[pastaav]

Interesting idea...have a idea point and wellcome to the forum

[Trond]

Hi again!

Here?s another way of doing it for those of you who would rather not have another table to look up (end result should be the same, though).
Next to your stat bonuses on your character sheet, you can simply write the following values: [(stat bonus x 2) + 50] OR if the GM prefers the ?harder? version: [(stat bonus x 2) + 30]. I call these values Stat Action Bonuses.

When the time comes to roll against one of the stats, simply find the Stat Action Bonus on your character sheet, add or subtract for difficulty, add an open-ended roll and look up the result as above (either higher or lower than 100 or use the static action table)

Example:     
                                                                                                       
       Temp          Bonus            Race Bonus         Tot             Stat Action Bonus
Co    56               + 0                                        +0                 50  OR    30                   
Ag    90               +10                                       +10                70         50                 
Sd    98               +20                    +5               +25               100         80
Re    100              +25                                      +25               100         80             
Me    85                +5                                       +5                  60         40
St     40                +0                    +5               +5                   60         40
Qu    90               +10                                      +10                  70         50
Pr     70               + 0                                         0                   50         30
In     24                 -5                                        -5                  40         20
Em    80                +5                                        +5                  60         40

Come to think of it, this can actually help out a quite a bit for lower level characters who are still in the process of developing their skills. In some cases, the GM may allow them to roll against a stat instead of an ?under-developed? skill. It should not be used in situations that require specialized training though.
Thanks for the feedback so far!

[Trond]

Hi again, guys!
Sorry for talking to myself so much on this thread  , but I have recently been updated a bit on how things work in RMSS, and RMFRP (I know RM2/RMC better). Apparently, the skill categories in those editions are broad enough to handle most situations if the GM puts a bit thought into it (see comments by Arioch on the RMSS thread about skill categories). This could make RM a pure skill-based system (which is what I believe was the original idea). However, I suspect that there might still be situations where a 'pure' stat check could be called for (or what do you think, Arioch?), if so my suggestion could apply, OR the GM could just rule that , for instance, a character with strength bonus of +5 or higher can lift a particular boulder, but others cannot (no roll required). What I do not like is a simple stat-bonus+1d100 roll, which is logically flawed. Any other suggestions?

[markc]

Hi again, guys!
Sorry for talking to myself so much on this thread  , but I have recently been updated a bit on how things work in RMSS, and RMFRP (I know RM2/RMC better). Apparently, the skill categories in those editions are broad enough to handle most situations if the GM puts a bit thought into it (see comments by Arioch on the RMSS thread about skill categories). This could make RM a pure skill-based system (which is what I believe was the original idea). However, I suspect that there might still be situations where a 'pure' stat check could be called for (or what do you think, Arioch?), if so my suggestion could apply, OR the GM could just rule that , for instance, a character with strength bonus of +5 or higher can lift a particular boulder, but others cannot (no roll required). What I do not like is a simple stat-bonus+1d100 roll, which is logically flawed. Any other suggestions?

 What I think you might be doing is adjusting the skill modifier of a task based on the stat of the indivdual. For example picking up a large rock and throwing it in RMSS might be athletic games-brawn and there might be further modifiers based on the weight of the rock. Such as -20 if you have a Strength stat below +1 RMSS, or +5 RM2. IMO that would be fine as throwing all rocks is not the same even if the skill is the same.

MDC

[Trond]

 What I think you might be doing is adjusting the skill modifier of a task based on the stat of the indivdual. For example picking up a large rock and throwing it in RMSS might be athletic games-brawn and there might be further modifiers based on the weight of the rock. Such as -20 if you have a Strength stat below +1 RMSS, or +5 RM2. IMO that would be fine as throwing all rocks is not the same even if the skill is the same.

Not a bad idea at all. You could, for instance, say that lifting a certain object is 'Routine' for a character with strength bonus +10 but 'Light' for a character with +5. This would effectively give two bonuses for characters with higher stat bonuses, but since we are talking about situations where your stat bonus should be important, that actually makes a lot of sense (that's why I multiplied by two in my formula above). This would not need any actual rules changes if you are using RMSS/RMFRP, but I would wish that the next edition gives more concrete examples and explains better the basic 'philosophy' behind the rules. That way, a GM can more easily work out specific situations on his/her own.

[markc]

Trond,
 I also allways like clear rules and examples. But I think sometimes it just does not happen. I have played D&D 4th and thier concept of one rule many exceptions is very hard to understand IMO because you never know when or what it is going to overrule your action. They give some examples and they leave the whole system wide open for additions and changes. So in the end IMO the play is not really sure just waht the rule is.

 MDC 

[Arioch]

What I think you might be doing is adjusting the skill modifier of a task based on the stat of the indivdual. For example picking up a large rock and throwing it in RMSS might be athletic games-brawn and there might be further modifiers based on the weight of the rock. Such as -20 if you have a Strength stat below +1 RMSS, or +5 RM2. IMO that would be fine as throwing all rocks is not the same even if the skill is the same.

MDC

I don't like this solution very much, because IMHO is like applying a double penalty to characters with a low stat. PCs with low strenght already have less chance to lift that rock than stronger PCs, so why giving them additional penalties? Is like giving a PC a -20 to his OB because his natural OB is lower than the one of his opponent.

Trond,
 I also allways like clear rules and examples. But I think sometimes it just does not happen. I have played D&D 4th and thier concept of one rule many exceptions is very hard to understand IMO because you never know when or what it is going to overrule your action. They give some examples and they leave the whole system wide open for additions and changes. So in the end IMO the play is not really sure just waht the rule is.

 MDC 

That sounds more like many rules and one big exception. 

[markc]

Arioch,
 I can see the double penalty but also IMO yuo have to put some limits on the task. For example should anybody be able to life a 1000 ton stone? I used a strength example because IMO it is an easy one but when we move to the realm of dexterity, quickness, constitution or others it gets a lot less clear on what to do.

 But I allways say what every works in your game is fine, just be up frount with the players so everyone can be on the same page.

MDC

[Trond]

I think MarkC has a point. The situations we are talking about are not the standard use of a specialized skill, but situations where stat bonuses should count for a lot. In normal skill use, the stat bonus makes up only a small percentage of the skill bonus, because your training in the skill is more important. However, when it comes down to situations where a raw stat bonus should be more important, such as when using your strength to lift something or break a chain, the bonus SHOULD count for much more IMO. Technique (skill) could still be important but in such situations your strength stat bonus is really what matters. If your strength stat bonus is on the minus side, then you can forget about trying to break that chain with your bare hands.

[Langthorne]

The 'lifting a rock' example is covered in RMSS by an existing skill (weightlifting), and the skill description even gives modifiers for things like the weight being uneven. But even with the skill, MarkC's point about which players should even have a chance of lifting an item comes into play. I would assign any perspective item a modifier based on weight, that way all players can attempt it, but the stronger and more skilled will have a better chance of success, with strength allied with skill being the best combination (and the wimp could even do it with an open ended roll).

On the topic of trond's stat roll system, I think it looks like an improvement on the existing system (especially as it is predicated upon there not already being a skill to cover the situation - meaning that it would happen very rarely in my own games). There are, however, very few situations where it should come into play - the competition of strength example could involve arm wrestling, tug of war, pushing, weightlifting - all of which are covered by skills (and in reality, skill in any of these areas gives a definite advantage over the unskilled - though a character would have to be VERY skilled to overcome a huge difference in strength - maybe a 20th level common orc who has been developing the EM skill every level...)

[markc]

Langthorne,
 Thanks for the weightlifting skill reminder as I had completly forgot about it.

MDC

[Trond]

On the topic of trond's stat roll system, I think it looks like an improvement on the existing system (especially as it is predicated upon there not already being a skill to cover the situation - meaning that it would happen very rarely in my own games).

I have to admit that I don't know RMSS/RMFRP well enough, since I never actually used those rules (although I was planning to), so my stat action roll concept was built to fill holes in the RM2/RMC systems. I like the idea that RM is basically a skill-based system, but every now and then I  have experienced situations where I had no clue how to resolve a situation using RM2. Often a stat-based roll is a fast solution as opposed to flipping through the rules for half the session. I think it could come into play quite often if you are using RM2 or RMC, but less often if you prefer RMFRP/RMSS, and particularly if you are using the latter the way Arioch suggests. I think I may introduce some very general skills into my planned RMC campaign to get closer to the RMSS situation. I will still keep my stat rolls as a backup option though .