Author Topic: RMC Questions  (Read 8608 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nightblade42

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 436
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #20 on: September 30, 2018, 09:36:20 PM »
Thanks for the clarifying Nighblade - that does help.

Re: Page 100: Tables?
I've only got RMC the core rulebook (the one with the female elf fighter on the cover). The specific part I'm quoting is on page 100, top left column, second bullet point.

There it says "table below" but I think it means "table above", i.e. the table on page 99. But I'm unsure.

Yes, now I see it.  You are right.  It seems to be referring to Table 08-05 which is on the bottom of page 99.

Quote
EDIT: Is ChL&CL, Character & Campaign Law?

Yes, RM2's Character Law & Campaign Law.

As an aside, I still find myself referring to the Rolemaster Companions (I-VII) as RMCs & have to change that notation to the "modern accepted notation" of RoCo (which I find cumbersome - but I understand the possible mix up one could have with Rolemaster Classic).  Though, I guess we never have that problem with SM2's companions  ;D (i.e. SMC (SM1's Companion); SMCI & SMCII)

Nightblade ->--

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2022, 11:17:58 AM »
Page 51: Height & Weight

"Example: High Men with an average height of 6'6" would roll on the ‘Common Men’ column and add 8".

I'm lost. Where does the High Men average height of 6'6" come from, and where does the "+8" come from?

Offline Elrich Maltah

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 92
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #22 on: May 15, 2022, 06:26:41 PM »
The average height for Common Men is mentioned at the bottom of Table 04-03, p. 50 (being 5'10" tall).

The height for High Men is deduced from the racial description on p. 43 (being 6'-7' tall, or an average of 6'6").

Thus, +8" = 6'6" - 5'10".

It'd be nice if there was one comprehensive reference for heights on the races in RMC, but, sadly, that's not possible since it was a direct copy from the original ChL and that info was never included there.

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2022, 01:40:44 AM »
The average height for Common Men is mentioned at the bottom of Table 04-03, p. 50 (being 5'10" tall).

The height for High Men is deduced from the racial description on p. 43 (being 6'-7' tall, or an average of 6'6").

Thus, +8" = 6'6" - 5'10".

It'd be nice if there was one comprehensive reference for heights on the races in RMC, but, sadly, that's not possible since it was a direct copy from the original ChL and that info was never included there.
Brilliant. Thank you

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2022, 07:42:29 AM »
Page 76: Skill Development
So a Bard could spend their 6 pts in any weapon category, for example, One-Handed Edged, but all 6 pts have to go into that weapon category (1HE), and the same is true with the 3/9, 7, and 15 DPs?

Also, you can only increase a weapon category with one of the six DPs?

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #25 on: May 19, 2022, 12:47:24 PM »
Page 135 "If a manoeuvre can be partially successful, then the original percentage result is the degree of success."

So, wanting to throw a rope so it entangles an outcropping of rock, you roll dice, get a percentage, then you have to roll a second time against that percentage. Am I reading that right? Two rolls to resolve one action is a bit much.

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #26 on: May 19, 2022, 01:02:02 PM »
Page 135 "If a manoeuvre can be partially successful, then the original percentage result is the degree of success."

So, wanting to throw a rope so it entangles an outcropping of rock, you roll dice, get a percentage, then you have to roll a second time against that percentage. Am I reading that right? Two rolls to resolve one action is a bit much.
That's not what it says. It says *if a manoeuver can be partially successful*. Your example manoeuver cannot be, it's a yes/no proposition.

However, a climbing manoeuver, for instance, can be : if you want to climb 30' of cliff and get a 60% result, you've climbed 18' in the allocated time. You  are slightly above mid-cliff and can continue (next time period).

Yes/no propositions are not resolved that way, since there are only two possible results : success, or failure.

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #27 on: May 19, 2022, 01:20:32 PM »
Page 135 "If a manoeuvre can be partially successful, then the original percentage result is the degree of success."

So, wanting to throw a rope so it entangles an outcropping of rock, you roll dice, get a percentage, then you have to roll a second time against that percentage. Am I reading that right? Two rolls to resolve one action is a bit much.
That's not what it says. It says *if a manoeuver can be partially successful*. Your example manoeuver cannot be, it's a yes/no proposition.

However, a climbing manoeuver, for instance, can be : if you want to climb 30' of cliff and get a 60% result, you've climbed 18' in the allocated time. You  are slightly above mid-cliff and can continue (next time period).

Yes/no propositions are not resolved that way, since there are only two possible results : success, or failure.
Ah, I see it now. Thanks for the help.

EDIT:

But then I read this

Page 135: "If this maneuver had been to throw a rope around a rock on the other side of the chasm and the same result had been obtained, then a second dice roll would have been required. If the second roll (unmodified) was 80 or less, then the rope throw would be successful; otherwise, it would fail"

Definitely sounds as if there are two rolls to lasso the rope over the rock.

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #28 on: May 19, 2022, 01:33:22 PM »
Post deleted

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #29 on: May 19, 2022, 01:37:06 PM »
Yes, there are two rolls if the maneuver is an all-or-nothing one.
'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 Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #30 on: May 19, 2022, 01:46:48 PM »
Yes, there are two rolls if the maneuver is an all-or-nothing one.
Thanks for clarifying. I have to ask though, why not just say, if you get 111+ you succeed, else you fail?

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #31 on: May 19, 2022, 08:20:42 PM »
Yes, there are two rolls if the maneuver is an all-or-nothing one.
Thanks for clarifying. I have to ask though, why not just say, if you get 111+ you succeed, else you fail?

Good question. I think it is because doing it this way allowed for a more parabolic difficulty curve for harder maneuvers. For example, if you just said 101+ or 111+ is success, you could succeed at an absurd (-70) maneuver at 171. However, if you look on the chart, you need a lot more to get a 100% success on absurd: You don't get 100% success till 226.

But if I were redesigning this, then yes, you can just say 101+ is success, anything less is failure. This for example is what RMU does (though it also admits of partial success at 76-100, if partial success is possible; otherwise, failure).
'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 #32 on: May 19, 2022, 11:48:47 PM »
Good question. I think it is because doing it this way allowed for a more parabolic difficulty curve for harder maneuvers. For example, if you just said 101+ or 111+ is success, you could succeed at an absurd (-70) maneuver at 171. However, if you look on the chart, you need a lot more to get a 100% success on absurd: You don't get 100% success till 226.

But if I were redesigning this, then yes, you can just say 101+ is success, anything less is failure. This for example is what RMU does (though it also admits of partial success at 76-100, if partial success is possible; otherwise, failure).
That's how I always did it - all-or nothing actions use the static manoeuver resolution, actions that can (or require) partial success measurement use the moving manoeuver resolution (and, seriously, those tables should have been renamed).

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #33 on: May 20, 2022, 01:36:23 AM »
Thanks, both for the feedback.

I'd like to house rule this so it becomes one roll with partial successes but I'm not sure how to word it. RM is a great game but has a lot of moving parts, so eliminating the need for two dice rolls where one would suffice, is a good move in my book. How would I write out this house rule?

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #34 on: May 20, 2022, 04:34:13 AM »
Basically, I want to change it but I don't want to risk messing up some other rule somewhere along the line due to my inexperience with RM.

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #35 on: May 20, 2022, 06:13:38 AM »
Page 143 encumbrance. I'm confused.

Bandrig weighs 220lbs so his weight allowance is 22lbs and he's moving in breastplate (20-30lbs). His deadweight is 27lbs.

1. How do you get a 3x weight allowance?

2. How is his Movement Rate reduced by 30 pts to 20' per round? -30 is (on the 10-10 Encumbrance Table) equal to 4x / 5x. Why isn't it a -10 reduction at 1x / 2x?

3. On page 144 it says Branding is carrying a deadweight of 27lbs, it goes on to say his encumbrance penalty is -10 since 27lbs is between 1x and 2x his weight allowance of 22lbs.

Honestly, I'm so confused I'm not even sure I'm asking the right questions :o

And I haven't even begun to configure in Strength affecting things.

I really hope RMU simplifies this because I'm about ready to give up on RMC and go with that.

Offline Majyk

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 477
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #36 on: May 20, 2022, 06:43:49 AM »
As drug pushers like to say, “The first one is free”, so anything up to 1x encumbrance has no mod.
10% of someone’s weight is carry-able without penalty.

For Maneuver Penalties from encumbrance, although dead weight - armour is wearable, redistributing the weight.
I’d have to re-look, but I thought there was a rule that armour weight didn’t count towards encumbrance = not to confuse you more!

EDIT: Confirmed in RMC ChL pg. 142:
“ Here we are dealing with “dead weight,” that which one carries rather than wears.”

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #37 on: May 20, 2022, 07:04:37 AM »
As drug pushers like to say, “The first one is free”, so anything up to 1x encumbrance has no mod.
10% of someone’s weight is carry-able without penalty.

For Maneuver Penalties from encumbrance, although dead weight - armour is wearable, redistributing the weight.
I’d have to re-look, but I thought there was a rule that armour weight didn’t count towards encumbrance = not to confuse you more!

EDIT: Confirmed in RMC ChL pg. 142:
“ Here we are dealing with “dead weight,” that which one carries rather than wears.”
Thanks Majyk, slowly getting to grips with it now. Still unsure though, how Brandig's Movement penalty is -30.

Page 143: "If Bandring was moving in a breastplate and with a 3x weight allowance load (0lbs to 66lbs with a 22lbs weight allowance?) his Base Movement Rate would be reduced to 20’ per round."

Looking at the table on page 142 it says...

2x to 3x = -20
3x to 4x = -25

Whereas -30 is...4x to 5x


Offline Majyk

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 477
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #38 on: May 20, 2022, 07:12:49 AM »
Ahah, so expanding upon things to get to “total” Movement Penalties vs just Encumbrance ones is where you start adding Minimum Maneuver Penalties from maxing out one’s skill Man. In Armour, “leftover” Strength bonuses, etc.

The example on 144 doesn’t show -30 but -10 for the dead weight Encumbrance penalty.
Are you asking, if it were -30 instead?

Ahah, Pg 143 is the 20’ / round example.
So it looks like they are using the -20 from a 2-3x weight penalty vs a 3-4x one.
This is correct because, as you say, 22lbs. is = to 0x to 1x, up to 44lbs. is 1x to 2x, up to 66lbs. is 2x - 3x.
Then the key factor is they’re supposing you know about the Breastplate Min. maneuver Penalty of -10 in the example on Pg 144.

Offline Cpt Tiberius J. Krik

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: RMC Questions
« Reply #39 on: May 20, 2022, 07:19:50 AM »
Ahah, so expanding upon things to get to “total” Movement Penalties vs just Encumbrance ones is where you start adding Minimum Maneuver Penalties from maxing out one’s skill Man. In Armour, “leftover” Strength bonuses, etc.

The example on 144 doesn’t show -30 but -10 for the dead weight Encumbrance penalty.
Are you asking, if it were -30 instead?
Sorry, I mean the example on page 143 where it says:

Page: "If Bandring was moving in a breastplate and with a 3x weight allowance load his Base Movement Rate would be reduced to 20’ per round..."

If his base Movement is 50', that's a reduction of -30 but the 3x weight allowances (page 142) correspond to 4x 5x.