Quote from: Cory Magel on November 04, 2010, 05:53:09 PMRM keeps its seperate attack and crit tables and if someone doesn't like that then maybe HARP is for them.

One roll combat resolution is not a very good idea if you use linear (d100, d20) dice mechanics. The results will be too swingy, which is even worse when you have possible high impact results (insta-kills).

Remember when I tried out the first release of HARP 20 odd years ago and the combat system was so impressively broken, that I never tried it again. Realized it got several optional combat systems later (and for good reason) and I bet it's much better now but somehow that horrible first impression is hard to shake.

Quote from: Thot on February 09, 2026, 03:03:08 PMI just today thought, maybe one should just roll crits with a D30+55 instead of D100. The usual modifiers apply, but without them, you would end up with one decent hit result for every hit location, thus removing the total randomness of the tables.

I mean the tables make the game. If you take them out, you have a mediocre character creation and skill system (at best).
The randomness of the crits is not a bug but a feature. Excitement is a value. Also that you need two rolls (attack and critical) mitigates some of the linearity of the crit result.

I never understood the drive for removal of tables of some people. Great tables allow complex or non-linear calculations to be done without stopping the game or electronic support.

I mean RMU doubled the amount of tables in the core rules compared to RM2. The baked in size differences in the weapon attack tables are an example.

Quote from: B Hanson on April 17, 2026, 07:05:40 PMI downloaded and reloaded here as a workaround.

Thanks! 

Тут представлені провідні українські новинні видання — від регіональних новин до наукових публікацій.
 
Тут можна дізнатися про важливі події з різних регіонів України, експертні аналізи, економічні тренди та політичні новини.
 
Чудовий вибір для тих, хто стежить за подіями, але не має часу шукати надійні джерела самостійно.
 
Завітайте та отримуйте актуальну інформацію зручно!

I handle it a bit more like Shadow Link in Zelda. Its a completely black duplicate of the caster and can attack controlled with a directed spell skill developed by the caster to control it. The shadow has some hit points associated with it but is treated as large creature. I let it step away from the actual shadow of the caster a la Peter Pan:) Really like that spell.

Illusions in RM are most often like holograms, sound waves and force fields. This can be confusing for players used to the D&D view on illusions.

I downloaded and reloaded here as a workaround.

Plus, to address DerGraumantel's statement: Monsters may be fun and "easy" to design, but you can't design them consistently within the new rules without Creature Law II.

Yeah, this is exactly what I was worried about when I discussed Creature Law II priority.  There are lots of good things that need to be covered (I too look forward to the wilderness rules), but the subject of creatures/monsters isn't complete yet and that's a critical part of the game.  There are 30 references to Creature Law II in Creature Law I and the underlying structure of monsters (which helps run them properly) isn't there yet (e.g. Archetypes, Scaling).  Creature Law II is still listed as a Core Book, which means the complete core rules aren't done, but supplemental rules are already close to being released.

I also take it as an illusion. Don't read too much into type E. Light Glamour, Light Terrain, and most of the Illusionist spells from Light Molding are also type E. The point of type E means that something is created, but that something could be purely visual. And also it means that there is no RR. So it's not just in the heads of viewers, the image is as real as any illusion.

That said, it could be more clear about which senses are included. There are spells on this list which affect light, sound, and scent (e.g., No Sense), so you could decide to include those. But there are no spells on this list which include an illusionary touch sense, so I would not include that. The sense of touch creates the most issues, and raises questions about what happens if it takes damage, how much can it lift, etc., which I think the original author would have addressed explicitly if that was the intent. (The wording of the spell is basically unchanged since Spell Law 1E.)

Compare it to the 11th level spell False Image on the Illusionist Guises spell list. The RMU version explicitly includes light and sound but no other senses. The 1E Spell Law version is very similar to Shadow Mystic, "Creates a duplicate of the caster". Other editions match 1E.

I would also have said it's an illusion, but the fact that it is a 'E' spell requires a bit more detail since elemental spells really create something. Does the illusion include senses other than sight ? If it does include touch, in particular, how many blows can it take before the touch component disappear ?
And if it is an illusion (without touch), why is the spell description so specific about the merge operation - which should be a no-brainer for a visual-only illusion ?
And since the spell list does include Merging spells that act on real matter, is this a hint that the shadow mystic is also real matter ?

Honestly, the spell description makes more sense if the spell actually creates a physical duplicate of the caster (even though I would probably rule that the spell is badly described and is actually an illusion). But the number of questions that interpretation raises is huge, including how well the caster can "move" the duplicate by concentrating (how much DB if it is attacked ? Does it feel pain if it is wounded ?).

Ruling that it is a visual illusion is much easier to manage. It disregards part of the spell description, but at least you know how it works. The problem with this interpretation is that it is barely better than the Phantasm I spell (the major differences being that 1) the duplicate moves the same way as the caster if the caster does not concentrate, while the Phantasm stops moving, and 2) the Phantasm can actually be something else than the caster's duplicate). So a bit underwhelming for a level 10 spell.
It would be better if the illusion included other senses - adding Sound and Smell, for instance, would bring it to a Phantasm III with less flexibility but the ability to duplicate caster's movements by default. Phantasm III is a level 9 spell for an illusionist, so this would be about OK. And not including the feel sense resolves all questions about how tough it is and how much damage it can dish out

Illusions are a headache in the best of days, but at least you don't have to rule how a wannabee magical quasi-doppleganger actually works