Topic: RMSS and Creatures and Treasures

[sulkow82]

I am wondering how compatible is RMSS with the RM2 series of Creatures and Treasures.

This question includes play balance.

The reason I ask is there is such a large library of monsters and treasures in those books that it would be a shame to let them go to waste.

[rdanhenry]

There were very few changes to the creatures between C&T/C&T II and C&M. Except for the wholesale replacement of the pseudo-Lovecraftian weirdo category (Elder Worms -> Agothu, or something like that), most of the alterations appear to be errors at least as often as updates. The format was changed to the far less compact C&T III version, with some uninspired prose padding to fill things out. I consider the C&T/C&T II monster entries to be an all-around superior version. Even in simple updating to RMSS core rules, C&M fails in several places. Treasures saw more change, with some attempt to actually match the items to the item-creation rules. Treasure Companion still contains items that violate its own rules, but it is much closer than RM2 ever was to coherent treatment of magical items.

You will have to make some adjustments between the versions, but these are few enough. If you have the appropriate RM2 books, you can leave some creatures (or items) with their original abilities instead of falling back on the alternative abilities (and C&T II usually gave a core power to replace powers that relied on a companion book that might not be available).

[sulkow82]

I do have the original RM2 books.  I have the PDFs of C&T I-III.  My original plan on this was to print them out into one binder.  It would be a "master work for encounters."

[markc]

  When I was co-GMing I found my co-GM using some monsters from RM2 that were way out of bounds in terms of OB/DB for RMSS. Also you have to be careful about the RM2 level bonus in RMSS.
MDC

[Cory Magel]

IMO, if you understand the mechanics behind both versions they are pretty easy to convert.  But if you only know one of them and nothing about the other you'll likely have some difficulties.

[sulkow82]

O.k.  Is it fairly straight forward to convert?  How would I do that?

[Cory Magel]

I really think the best way to do it is take a few of the same creatures from both versions, put them next to each other, and 'eyeball' the differences.  Remember, your conversion (if one is even needed) doesn't need to be perfect, just in the ball park really imo.

[Tommi]

Differences are really small - almost no need to convert.

Most statistics like OB,DB, IQ, speed didn't change at all (Many creatures are not possible to create with RMSS/RMFRP - I personally  don't find that bad - they are not player characters):

Some points that changed
-Variable hit system changed a bit. about 10% difference
-No exotic crits  - e.g. last session I used skullpack that used nether breath in C&T 2 and thus internal disruption crits in RMSS cold breath and cold crits, acit --> heat like that..
-about three times the old amount of PPs
-changes to spell lists that creatures have - C&T II assumes up to RMCIII - no necromancers spells or plasma law...
-some text that may help fleshing out the creatures and sometimes some tactical tips.
-RMSS C&M loses magical material part where e.g. leans are described.
-RMSS C&M loosed (as mentioned above) elder worms that I do like - however in Dark Space they are better handled

I've newer had problem with items that are not immediately created with spell law spells. Easiest way to explain them is Lord Research. However I think that every alchemist has own recipes and spells only define the power level that can be created. And then there are material like  RM2 Alchemy companion.   If in C&T there were only items that are straight out of spell lists Rm would be too D&Desque  - where all items are basically copies from spells...