Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10
1
ICE News and Discussion / Director's Briefing - May 2024
« Last post by NicholasHMCaldwell on Today at 11:01:54 AM »
Welcome

To the one hundred-and-fifty-fourth Briefing and fifth scheduled Briefing of 2024.

Gen Con 2024

I mentioned last time that all the tables at Dragonmeet 2024 had sold out within a week. The exhibit hall map for Gen Con 2024 has been released and that is on a whole different level of scale. Dragonmeet maps show specific tables, Gen Con show booths and sets of booths. ICE is on the map key and our booth number is #2904. It is an impressively long list of exhibitors.

As with Dragonmeet, contact Colin if you are intending on running Rolemaster or HARP (or Spacemaster or any other ICE games for that matter). We would really like to publicise your games.

Rolemaster

I will be undertaking my review pass of RMU Treasure Law with the intention of reaching a final print master. The intention isn’t to drive Nick crazy as I spiral inwards towards the perfect master but I am sure between software failing to save changes or uploading correctly, there will be at least one set of changes that Nick makes but don’t take as expected. Hence the process is one of requesting changes, changes being made, changes being checked, and so on until I cannot find any residual issues.

Software – ERA

As mentioned last time, we have switched to the zip format for ERA. The latest base version of the software has been uploaded and a new dataset for RMFRP Construct Companion has also been released.

Software – AutoHARP3

David Klecker is happy again with the new version of AutoHARP, known as AutoHARP3. The base package AutoHARP3 Fantasy is now available on DriveThru, and the Martial Law and College of Magic datasets will go live across the week as DriveThru prefers that publishers release one new product per day if possible. AutoHARP3 is being released as new products as it is substantially changed from earlier versions.

I have sent out emails via DriveThru already providing discount codes so that anyone who purchased AutoHARP Fantasy, AutoHARP Martial Law or AutoHARP College of Magics can use the code to upgrade for Free to the equivalent AutoHARP3 file. You can use these codes even before the product goes live.

If you did not set your DriveThru email preferences to receive email from ICE, please ask Colin very nicely for the codes.

HARP

I have completed my review pass of HARP Steampunk, written by the incomparable Phil Masters. (Yes, the Phil Masters who has written umpteen GURPS sourcebooks and supplements, as well as books and articles for other systems). This has been written as a supplement that can be used with either the HARP Fantasy or the HARP SF rulebook. The expectation is that most GMs would use HARP Steampunk for a steampunk setting, but there is nothing to stop GMs moving their fantasy world to the Age of Steam or incorporating more technologically backward worlds in a science-fiction universe.

HARP Steampunk uses the standard HARP character creation process but introduces a distinct set of professions for the Age of Steam and adjusts the skill set, moving some skills into different categories for a tighter fit to the milieu. Characters may be equipped with historical gear or with more over-the-top marvellous steam items and electrical marvels. Characters can call for a hansom cab in the style of Sherlock Holmes or perhaps cruise the seas in a submarine akin to Nemo’s Nautilus. Phil has created a set of subtle mystical powers in keeping with the steampunk setting, which is reinforced with a selection of spiritual adversaries. It is an excellent manuscript.
I have two areas that I wish to double-check, namely if there are any additional skills that could be added to the training packages, and whether some stat-based maneuvers might be better positioned as skill maneuvers. However, I can happily let Colin start commissioning artwork for it.

We will have much more to say about HARP Steampunk once we approach its release.

Until next time
Please stay safe and keep gaming.
Best wishes,
Nicholas
2
RMC/RM2 / Re: Would Matter Disruption work against a woodwall?
« Last post by Spectre771 on Today at 06:03:24 AM »
The spell specifically states "inorganic."  It could be like Terminator.  Something about living material protects it during teleportation, non-living material doesn't make it through  i.e.: Nude Arnold.  This particular evil spell doesn't affect living material.  If this spell user was in my group, I would have him learn another spell list that would disrupt organic/living material.
Organic and living are two completely different things.
The fact that people tend to mix them tends to prove my point: this is a poorly worded spell if, by "inorganic", the authors meant "non-living".

The hardwood floors in my kitchen are non-living and organic.  The trees in my yard are living and organic.  Both made of wood, but either item should survive the spell being cast on them.

Perhaps I chose the incorrect wording when trying to illustrate my example.  Most likely... I misquoted the Terminator movie as I haven't watched it in 20+ years.  Maybe John said "...organic material..." instead of "...living material..."

* - I reread my initial post.  I wrote "This particular evil spell doesn't affect living material."  My mistake.  To clarify, I meant to write "organic material."  My apologies.  MisterK, your reply to my mistype is accurate.

3
RMC/RM2 / Re: Would Matter Disruption work against a woodwall?
« Last post by MisterK on Today at 12:06:23 AM »
The spell specifically states "inorganic."  It could be like Terminator.  Something about living material protects it during teleportation, non-living material doesn't make it through  i.e.: Nude Arnold.  This particular evil spell doesn't affect living material.  If this spell user was in my group, I would have him learn another spell list that would disrupt organic/living material.
Organic and living are two completely different things.
The fact that people tend to mix them tends to prove my point: this is a poorly worded spell if, by "inorganic", the authors meant "non-living".
4
Rolemaster / Re: Rolemaster Unified art: what happened?
« Last post by rdanhenry on May 18, 2024, 04:26:46 PM »
Just to be clear, the kind of textured-background, color-heavy design was created specifically to make it hard to scan. It may now be copied without thought for its origin, but it's fundamentally a copy-protection measure.
5
RMC/RM2 / Re: Would Matter Disruption work against a woodwall?
« Last post by Spectre771 on May 18, 2024, 03:16:25 PM »
The spell specifically states "inorganic."  It could be like Terminator.  Something about living material protects it during teleportation, non-living material doesn't make it through  i.e.: Nude Arnold.  This particular evil spell doesn't affect living material.  If this spell user was in my group, I would have him learn another spell list that would disrupt organic/living material.
6
Rolemaster / Re: Rolemaster Unified art: what happened?
« Last post by cdcooley on May 18, 2024, 02:12:50 PM »
It's not (only) about paying more for art.
Look at the layout here.
https://imgur.com/a/14hOu4p
This is a random page, literally the first page I flipped to from the last pdf I had open.
See how the shape of the art has been incorporated into the column layout of the page? See how background textures have been used? See how there is a shadow from the dwarf which spills over into the page? This all gives it life and visual appeal. It's basic stuff at this point. Nothing to do with budget.

I don't love the background texture, it looks kind of cool at the expense of readability. Similarly with wrapping text around images. Text is full justified for readability. I don't think that adds anything. It's dynamic in the sense that it disrupts the text layout, but that's also its weakness.
I agree. A book formatted that way may look pretty and have an initial appeal, but for me it's extremely hard to read and would be horrible as a reference. Accessibility for people with differing vision and perception issues is important.

The text formatting used to structure the page loses much of its effectiveness when combined with text being restructured purely for artistic purposes. The reduced (and variable) contrast created by the background is harder for me to read. And the overall visual clutter of the outer border makes it hard for me to focus on the text.

To me the layout of the RMU books is far superior to that example page.
7
RMC/RM2 / Re: Would Matter Disruption work against a woodwall?
« Last post by EltonJ on May 18, 2024, 10:59:53 AM »
I agree with the reply, but it's still odd. The list is matter disruption, and I can't see why the spell should be limited to inorganic matter just because no one wants it to be used on *living* matter. It is an evil Essence list, I have trouble finding a reason why stone and metal would be OK but wood would not. It would be OK if there was a "organic matter disruption" spell somewhere else, but there isn't.

I am squarely under the impression that the authors wanted to avoid the use of such spells on living matter (because it would essentially be a 'RR or die' kind of spell, and we all know that such spells are only found in the Black Channels list :-p). But excluding wood (what about petrified wood ?), cotton and all kinds of cloth, alcohol and basically all kinds of carbon compounds (coal, sugar, oil...), just because the spell is poorly worded seems being overly pedantic to me - having the spell work on water (inorganic) but not on oil, on air (mostly inorganic) but not on methane, ammonia, carbon dioxide and others, or on ruby but not on diamond, makes absolutely no sense to me.

I would house rule it into "inanimate" matter. Or "unliving" if you want to be even less restrictive (the difference being "inanimate" doesn't work on a stone golem or an undead, but "unliving" does).

Still, it's a F spell, not a U spell. Matter gets a RR. Wood, if affected, might have a lower level than iron :)

This sounds like a good idea to redo a spell to be "Unliving" disruption!
8
General Discussion / Re: adventuring with a pacifist
« Last post by MisterK on May 18, 2024, 06:37:36 AM »
As for how XP are gained, I think the US has a different approach from Europe. In the US, D&D evolved from wargaming roots and always relied on combat as an important gameplay factor. Which is why many games have very elaborate combat rules that can cross over into wargaming or even boardgame territory. The European approach feels more story-driven and character based, with combat as an adjunct instead of a core component. But the European RPG industry was of course still heavily influenced by the US approach.
I don't know if it's US vs Europe. It's mostly wargame-derived vs storytelling-derived. For instance, Call of Cthulhu had rules for combat (basically the same rules as Runequest because the basic system is the same), but you weren't expected to fight much because combat with guns and without armour is very, very lethal, and combat against Cthuloid Abominations From Outer Space is even more so. Whereas D&D, Traveller, Space Opera (and even RQ to an extend) was based on medieval western fantasy: frontier mentality where guns are always Plan B and are often Plan A, and there are wolves and aliens (or indians). It's more "frontier RPG" vs "urban RPG".

Europe doubled down on this because 'frontier' has not existed in Europe for quite a bit of time and has not been glorified since the decolonisation - but delve a bit into colonial-period RPGs produced in Europe and you will see the same kind of heroic gunslinger (or swordbearer) glorification - the hero of the frontier, with a dose of period-appropriate white supremacy on top. In other words, scratch the surface and we are basically the same.

I think it's a basic dichotomy of RPGs: do you want to produce the equivalent of a Hollywood action movie, or the equivalent of a drama ? Most people will lean towards action movie: it's easier to grasp, easier to slip into and out of, provides immediate satisfaction, and you maintain a healthy distance from your slightly bloodthirsty and smilingly sociopathic character. It's the same for video games: action games outnumber (and outsell) narrative games by at least one order of magnitude (and probably several). It's not a difference between US and Europe so much as a difference between emotionally simple and complex. Action games speak to a very primal part of us, the part who yearns for a simple world where violence is a legitimate answer to every problem (and where you are proficient in dealing it).

It's only more obvious in the US because the gun culture is out in the open (the US history of being built by the gun is still recent, ours - built by the sword - a bit less so), but I wouldn't trust many of my fellow Europeans if anyone had access to a gun here.
9
RMC/RM2 / Re: Would Matter Disruption work against a woodwall?
« Last post by MisterK on May 18, 2024, 06:12:11 AM »
I agree with the reply, but it's still odd. The list is matter disruption, and I can't see why the spell should be limited to inorganic matter just because no one wants it to be used on *living* matter. It is an evil Essence list, I have trouble finding a reason why stone and metal would be OK but wood would not. It would be OK if there was a "organic matter disruption" spell somewhere else, but there isn't.

I am squarely under the impression that the authors wanted to avoid the use of such spells on living matter (because it would essentially be a 'RR or die' kind of spell, and we all know that such spells are only found in the Black Channels list :-p). But excluding wood (what about petrified wood ?), cotton and all kinds of cloth, alcohol and basically all kinds of carbon compounds (coal, sugar, oil...), just because the spell is poorly worded seems being overly pedantic to me - having the spell work on water (inorganic) but not on oil, on air (mostly inorganic) but not on methane, ammonia, carbon dioxide and others, or on ruby but not on diamond, makes absolutely no sense to me.

I would house rule it into "inanimate" matter. Or "unliving" if you want to be even less restrictive (the difference being "inanimate" doesn't work on a stone golem or an undead, but "unliving" does).

Still, it's a F spell, not a U spell. Matter gets a RR. Wood, if affected, might have a lower level than iron :)
10
RMC/RM2 / Re: Would Matter Disruption work against a woodwall?
« Last post by rdanhenry on May 17, 2024, 02:51:44 PM »
Wood is organic. So, no, you'll need a different spell. Or maybe an axe.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10