Author Topic: RMC Questions  (Read 8621 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,101
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #80 on: May 24, 2022, 10:16:25 AM »
RMU also handles it with skills. E.g. you would use Weight Training for those feats of strength, Acrobatics for balance.
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline EltonJ

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 377
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #81 on: May 24, 2022, 11:33:48 AM »
Thank all for the advice. Much to ponder.

Here's another question, what does a player roll when their character wants to:

- lift a (St) heavy log off the road so the coach can continue on

- walk across (Ag) a thin beam without falling off

I can't find any rules for Stat rolls. If you're using just St, or just Ag, that's extremely swingy on d100.

Assuming you are using Secondary skills, there is almost no 'just a stat' situation that probably isn't covered by a skill. For example, I'm pretty sure balance is a skill, as well as Laborer or something similar.

Against the Darkmaster handles it fairly straightforward: Athletics, Acrobatics, and Lore skills are ALWAYS used for basic attribute rolls. Honestly, if I were playing RMC without RoCo2 skills, I would change 'climbing' to Athletics and Swimming to Acrobatics to handle those sorts of situations. Memory and Reasoning I can't ever imagine forcing a player to roll.

Rolemaster is designed so you can rely on skills instead of just stat rolls.  Rolemaster differs from D&D because of this.

Offline Majyk

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 477
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #82 on: May 26, 2022, 11:22:31 PM »
As a Player, I love roleplaying based off of my characters’ stats.

Reasoning is smarts to me, and for putting two and two together in a timely fashion.
Is it a dump stat for most folks?

- Get them to roll against it to see if they’re following the techno-speak conversation properly and make proper judgements from it. 
Intelligent players tend to gave intelligent characters even when they aren’t!

Memory is another great one.
I had(being the key word) an eidetic memory back in the day and miss it the most as a high-functioning insomniac where recent days & decades are now ethereal to me from its poisonous effects!
Again, most players dump stat these, relying on their own IRL ones.  A quick roll will confirm if they do remember events correctly.

I don’t mean nerfing gameplay, but the best RP happens when one needs to battle through character-Dementia due to poor mental stats and I’m here for those iconic storytelling times of when Fizban forgets that spell that starts with an “F”…


Memory and Reasoning I can't ever imagine forcing a player to roll.

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #83 on: May 27, 2022, 12:35:04 AM »
As a Player, I love roleplaying based off of my characters’ stats.
But you don't need dice rolls to roleplay based on your character stats...

If someone has a character with low memory, let him roleplay the low memory and "forget" things. If another character has eidetic memory, have the GM take that into account when deciding whether they remember something (the answer most likely being "of course yes").

Rolling against stats for those situations is only useful when people are *not* roleplaying on their own.

And letting players have a say in how they roleplay their character's weaknesses gives them agency, which is a side bonus.

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #84 on: May 27, 2022, 09:07:53 AM »
The problem I have with a 'use only skills' approach is that, especially in RM2/C, there is too much skill bloat, and consequently characters have too many gaps in their skill repertoire (because there are too many skills).

My character wants to Jump up to a ledge... oops, he only has skill in Acrobatics, Pole-Vaulting, and Climbing, not 'Jumping', so although he is very athletic and should be able to jump rather easily, he is taking a -25 and having a very tough time doing this.

Or he wants to open tightly closed jar of jam. What skill should I use for that? And what if I don't have skill in 'Jar Opening'? It is much easier for me just to make a Strength check. All characters with decent strength should have a reasonable chance to open a jar, even if they don't have any formal training in a specialized skill that covers it. However, due to the limited number of development points and the considerable skill bloat, only a small number of characters will have skill in any particular skill. Thus, if you use a 'skills only' approach, these simple tasks that everyone should be able to do unfortunately get penalized at a rate of -25 and become much harder than they reasonably should.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #85 on: May 27, 2022, 12:26:57 PM »
You can change the skill list so that each skill covers more situations. I mean, if some games can cover all possible situations with 20 skills, it must be possible to reach a compromise.

Granted, given that Rolemaster seems to thrive when creating a skill whenever a specific situation occurs, it might be an uphill battle :)

[I also think that skills that are not used in conflict - not necessarily combat, but conflict - situations should be replaced with descriptors / qualifiers / background description, but that's just me].

Offline Tywyll

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #86 on: June 03, 2022, 02:02:35 PM »
The problem I have with a 'use only skills' approach is that, especially in RM2/C, there is too much skill bloat, and consequently characters have too many gaps in their skill repertoire (because there are too many skills).

My character wants to Jump up to a ledge... oops, he only has skill in Acrobatics, Pole-Vaulting, and Climbing, not 'Jumping', so although he is very athletic and should be able to jump rather easily, he is taking a -25 and having a very tough time doing this.

Or he wants to open tightly closed jar of jam. What skill should I use for that? And what if I don't have skill in 'Jar Opening'? It is much easier for me just to make a Strength check. All characters with decent strength should have a reasonable chance to open a jar, even if they don't have any formal training in a specialized skill that covers it. However, due to the limited number of development points and the considerable skill bloat, only a small number of characters will have skill in any particular skill. Thus, if you use a 'skills only' approach, these simple tasks that everyone should be able to do unfortunately get penalized at a rate of -25 and become much harder than they reasonably should.


Yeah, I totally agree. When I was younger, I'd play with 200+ skills because I didn't know any better. But now? Forget that noise.

I think Against the Darkmaster has resolved the issue quite well with Acrobatics (for Dex rolls), Athletics (for Str rolls), Perception for Wisdom, Charisma for Bearing/Presence roll, etc. Yes there are many more skills for specific things, but those are large enough umbrellas for 'basic skill roll' to live under.

Like, I am happy with an abstract skill system. I don't need Jar Opening or Sense Ambush or Skiing (which I feel has probably never been used other than the GM throwing a player a bone).

Offline Vladimir

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #87 on: June 04, 2022, 01:12:24 AM »
The problem I have with a 'use only skills' approach is that, especially in RM2/C, there is too much skill bloat, and consequently characters have too many gaps in their skill repertoire (because there are too many skills).
  That is assuming that every action is covered by a specific skill, and not skill categories that cover several actions under one skill. Taking one general skill and parsing it into several specific skills does not make a game more playable or realistic; and just becomes a DP soak. As a professional cook, I know that there are skills associated with roasting, frying and steaming foods, and some meats turn out better with a specific form of preparation but in a game, an overall cooking category would generally cover executing a decent meal under normal conditions.                                                             
Skills are refined stats, a combinations of mental and physical abilities combined with training that produce more than the sum of their basic qualities. Everybody learns to walk and most people don't have to roll to see if they could walk under normal conditions. Walking doesn't require as much strength as it does balance so in the realm of athletics, walking compares more with gymnastics than weight lifting.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
When the Master governs, the people
are hardly aware that he exists.
-Lao Tzu

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #88 on: June 05, 2022, 10:07:44 AM »
That's fine, but it seems to apply more to RMSS/FRP (where as I understand it you can buy skill in a category) than to RM2/C (where you can only buy individual skills).

RM2 simply has too many skills, at least if you add in the new skills in the Companions. Character Law had 28 primary skills (if you treat different weapons and types of armor as separate skills) and 40 secondary skills, but that very manageable number had bloated to 214 by the time of Companion II, and then more were added after. That's just too much. Instead of one Perception skill, you have:
--Detect Traps
--Direction Sense
--General Perception
--Lie Perception
--Locate Secret Opening
--Poison Perception
--Read Tracks (note this is separate from the 'Tracking' skill below!)
--Sense Ambush
--Sense Reality Warp
--Surveillance
--Time Sense
--Tracking

So my Ranger has enough points to be an expert in Tracking, but can't 'Read Tracks' because that is a different skill.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #89 on: June 05, 2022, 10:54:24 AM »
The problem was clearly twofold
- skill list bloating all by itself is a pain because, as a player, you have to keep the whole list in mind when developing your character in order to avoid leaving out an important skill for your character concept, and as a GM, you run the risk of focusing on the skills you remember and ignoring the others when asking for skill checks.
- and skill list bloating without a corresponding increase in DP just means that characters are, on average, less and less proficient.

I think the first (and main) question you have to ask yourself as a GM is 'what is important in my game ?', and the second is 'how many skills am I comfortable with ?'. Think about special cases (combat styles, for instance - there might be dozens of different skills, but how many will a character actually develop ?), then make your list, keeping in mind that you might want a bit more detail for skills that are central to your game.

Then, adjust available DPs so that people need to either prioritise or be consistently subpar in everything - keeping in mind that RM integrates diminishing return in skill development, so depending on your game perspective, the 'subpar' statement might be more like 'not brilliant, but still quite good', and that a few skills (notably spell lists) have a different logic.

Everything else can be handled by style variations, skill focus, and background traits for everything you do not want (or do not need) to quantify because it is only for character colour and it will not be used in stress situations.

For instance, if a player says "my character plays the piano really well", then you have two options
- either make it a skill, but if you do that, you have a duty to ensure (as a GM) that this skill will be one of the focus of your game, taking the spotlight in a number of scenes and being key for a number of conflict situations.
- or you consider that this is a "background" skill, and do not need to quantify it beyond a "XXX plays the piano really well". It might be used for a couple if scenes because the character finds themselves in a situation where they can show off, and it might even give them brownie points with an NPC or two in the right circumstances, but it will not be used in a conflict situation.

And basically, you trim the skill list according to that logic.

The problem with a number of games (especially the more or less "generic" systems) is that, since they have no intrinsic focus, they provide you with a default skill list that aims at covering any game style - and they seldom tell you that trimming the skill list becomes your job as a GM, because only you know what kind of game you will be conducting. The additional drawback is that, since they have a default skill list that covers every possible case (and far too many for you, typically), they don't have additional mechanisms to handle the "no skill required" situation - and, as a GM, you have to come up with a mechanism all on your own (or pilfer it from another game system).

Offline Majyk

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 477
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #90 on: June 05, 2022, 11:49:28 AM »
100% MisterK.

We just converted a few friends over from tabletop to Fantasy Grounds(thanks Dakadin and all who helped!) and our resident Munchkin made a High Warrior Monk(RMC).

Despite extremely cheap M.A. skills, he somehow made a PC without Perception/Climbing/First Aid which while core skills - admittedly First Aid isn’t for everyone but **should** be, LOL! - were missed.
Whether on purpose or design, heh.

Even D&D3e - heavily influenced by his years with ICE, Monte Cook flooded it with skills that every character finally has access to universally - had issues with bloat before they(3.5e) and Paizo(3.75e?) picked up the pieces and combined Move Silently/Hide in Shadows into a Sneak(ing) skill along with Listen/Spot into Perception; Pick Lock/Disable Device into the latter’s purview or scope of skill ability.

I agree a happy medium has reduced skills or a bump of skill points one can spend on Secondary ones(restricting Combat ones as much as y’can, GMs out there: do this or the Munchkins will fill out on Disarm, Subduing, etc.!).

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,101
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #91 on: June 05, 2022, 05:15:39 PM »
For instance, if a player says "my character plays the piano really well", then you have two options
- either make it a skill, but if you do that, you have a duty to ensure (as a GM) that this skill will be one of the focus of your game, taking the spotlight in a number of scenes and being key for a number of conflict situations.
- or you consider that this is a "background" skill, and do not need to quantify it beyond a "XXX plays the piano really well". It might be used for a couple if scenes because the character finds themselves in a situation where they can show off, and it might even give them brownie points with an NPC or two in the right circumstances, but it will not be used in a conflict situation.

Optional specializations (e.g. as appears in RMSS SoHK) give you another option between those two. Then you can have a more general skill like "music" with a specialization bonus in "piano". That lets the player reflect something they think is important about their characterization without actually needing a new skill.

You still need to find a way for music to become relevant in the story, and optimally even the occasional piano, but at least the skill isn't piano-specific. The player should help you find ways for music to become relevant (e.g. instead of diplomacy they may try to ingratiate themselves with their performance skills).
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline Vladimir

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #92 on: June 05, 2022, 06:46:54 PM »
You still need to find a way for music to become relevant in the story, and optimally even the occasional piano, but at least the skill isn't piano-specific. The player should help you find ways for music to become relevant (e.g. instead of diplomacy they may try to ingratiate themselves with their performance skills).
  Historically, entertainers held a prominent place in societies. Bards like Orpheus, who travelled with Jason and the Argonauts in search of the Golden Fleece, was able to charm animals, plants, and even stones. A "music" skill that allows you to read sheet music could let you transcribe works from piano to other instruments, such as accordion or bagpipes. I know many very good musicians who cannot read music but have a large repertoire of tunes learned by ear. As a teen, I learned to transcribe musical scores from pencil to ink before there were computers to print out scores on paper. Before recorded music hit the market, sheet music publishing was a huge industry in the US and Europe. On union scale, during the 1970s I could make $20 an hour just copying sheet music and more if I could score for individual instruments -a lot more than one of my classmates earned -he taught clumsy old ladies how to dance at an Arthur Murray studio.

  The point being that entertainment was very valuable thousands of years ago. Tolkein makes entertainment in songs, stories and riddles key elements in his stories. Before mass media, people found ways to entertain themselves and good entertainers were usually welcome.
When the Master governs, the people
are hardly aware that he exists.
-Lao Tzu

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #93 on: June 05, 2022, 10:00:29 PM »

Optional specializations (e.g. as appears in RMSS SoHK) give you another option between those two. Then you can have a more general skill like "music" with a specialization bonus in "piano". That lets the player reflect something they think is important about their characterization without actually needing a new skill.


Though I never played RMSS/FRP and did not know this was an option till now, nor did I see it in RMU, this is actually how I have been playing skills in RMU. I like it.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #94 on: June 05, 2022, 11:47:43 PM »
Optional specializations (e.g. as appears in RMSS SoHK) give you another option between those two. Then you can have a more general skill like "music" with a specialization bonus in "piano". That lets the player reflect something they think is important about their characterization without actually needing a new skill.
That's what I meant by
"Everything else can be handled by style variations, skill focus, and background traits for everything you do not want (or do not need) to quantify because it is only for character colour and it will not be used in stress situations."

However, I stand by what I said - even if piano is a specialisation of "music performance", or even "music", or even "art", it is the GM's decision to have this skill in the skill list (i.e. accepting that this is part of the *reduced* list they want to bother with) and make it meaningful (i.e. offering opportunities to put the spotlight on the skill user in stressful situations).

Taking advantage of said opportunities (reactively or proactively), of course, is the responsibility if the player(s).

My personal preference is for a fairly short skill list (I'd say around 30). I typically push all lore, language, and art/craft proficiencies in the "background talents" bag - the players get the labels as part of their upbringing, education, or declared hobbies, but they know I won't ask them to roll for any of them - I'll use the Amber method.

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,101
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #95 on: June 06, 2022, 12:11:13 AM »
It will be in the Character Companion. But the rule is basically the same as SoHK: to pick an optional specialization, you sacrifice one rank, and then when using the skill in its specialization you are treated as having 50% more ranks. This only applies to skills that do not already require specialization. So for example if you have purchased 7 ranks in Music, you could sacrifice one of those ranks so you only have 6 (which amounts to a very small penalty for things outside your specialization), but you are treated as if you had 9 for purposes of your Piano specialization. You can only have one optional specialization per skill; if you want to switch it costs you another rank.

Because the bonus is to the number of ranks, it is limited by the diminishing returns of rank bonuses. E.g. if you have 10 ranks in the base skill for 15 ranks in your optional specialization, your base rank bonus is +50 (5 per rank) but your specialization's rank bonus is +65 rather than +70 (because ranks 11-20 only get you +3/rank). If it's a professional skill that would be +60 and +80 respectively. That helps keep the bonus in a reasonable range.

In my current game, I have characters with Medicine with a specialization in cauterization (character has hemophilia and is obsessive about bleeding injuries), in Herbalism for herbs from forests (character's area of origin), in Perception for magical scrying (star mage), Traps that are stonework (character uses earth-based magic), etc. So while they give helpful bonuses, they also add some characterization.

I'm not sure if a similar rule exists for RM2 but there's no reason the same thing couldn't work there.
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #96 on: June 06, 2022, 02:34:36 PM »
I don't remember anything like that in RM2, but I could be wrong (I haven't gone through all the Companions to check). RM2 did of course have similar skills systems, such as giving partial ranks to related skills, but I don't remember anything quite like the SoHK system.

The one thing I dislike about the SoHK system (though as I noted above, I like the general concept of specializations being optional), is that it does require you to compare and adjust skill ranks, which can slow down a game to some extent. What I've been doing in RMU is to say that difficulties of maneuvers/actions are reduced by two steps for rolls in your specialty. E.g. A Very Hard (-20) maneuver would be reduced to a Medium (0) difficulty maneuver if it were in your specialty. This way, I don't have to look up the specific number of ranks a character/NPC/monster has in the skill in order to resolve the maneuver.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,101
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #97 on: June 06, 2022, 03:15:33 PM »
We just have the specialized and non-specialized bonuses calculated already on the character sheet, so it doesn't slow anything down.

A two step difficulty shift is easy but could give extreme results, e.g. a character with just a couple of ranks could still get an effective bonus of +40 (e.g. Routine to Casual) or +50 (Nigh Impossible to Sheer Folly). You could of course just give a flat +20 bonus, which would be the same for the middle of the scale but not at the extremes.
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #98 on: June 06, 2022, 04:07:14 PM »
Yes, maybe a flat bonus would be better.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline pastaav

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,609
  • OIC Points +0/-0
    • Swedish gaming club
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #99 on: June 08, 2022, 12:46:25 PM »
It will be in the Character Companion. But the rule is basically the same as SoHK: to pick an optional specialization, you sacrifice one rank, and then when using the skill in its specialization you are treated as having 50% more ranks. This only applies to skills that do not already require specialization. So for example if you have purchased 7 ranks in Music, you could sacrifice one of those ranks so you only have 6 (which amounts to a very small penalty for things outside your specialization), but you are treated as if you had 9 for purposes of your Piano specialization. You can only have one optional specialization per skill; if you want to switch it costs you another rank.

This is maybe off topic to this part of the forum...but the limitation that you can only have one specialization for each skill is needed from the flat costing scheme of one rank to get the specialization. Sacrifice a couple of ranks to get specializations in all major uses of the skill would be very attractive.

On the other hand, in one of my campaigns, I with much success used the scheme that the cost for each specialization is 1 + plus the number of specializations already in the skill. The lure of having more specializations is balanced by using more and more ranks.

In the long run, there were quite a few specializations for all characters since double ranks as a benefit is quite attractive even if the cost is steep. If Character Companion will limit it to +50% ranks then the economy of it might be better so that my costing scheme would work even better. Maybe you could make use of my concept in Character Companion.
/Pa Staav