Topic: Making RMSS and RMFRP better

[Langthorne]

I'd rather have skills replace spells than spells replace skills.

Absolutely agree.

The way I get around 'spells that replace skills' is to make them all into 'spells that give a bonus to skills'

[Doridian]

In my opinion the way Rolemaster handles attacks and spell casting is unbeatable; character generation is gorgeous.

Yet I think that the game needs one general improvement and I?ll try here to summarize it.

It?s all just stemming from the gorgeousness of the good things I pointed out before. Think at the details of character generation, at the fact that you need a spreadsheet to keep consistent with all of the little (or large) differences among races and among professions (and even among training packages). At the end of the generation process you arrive at a character whose skill bonuses have been finely tuned, with a big effort on the part of the player in deciding the allocation of development points. And then, what happens to that real jewel that is a character generated with those gorgeous rules that encompass skill categories, stat potentials, logarithmic skill bonus progression, etc??

It happens that the glue that should keep together all of these wonderful pieces is too roughly defined. Let me point out some examples. Excuse me if they are not anymore up to date (I would be glad!) because I do not possess anything more recent than RMSS. 

Think at how much precision is in the combat tables (just to add one more element to character generation) and compare it with the fact that the transition between narrative and action rounds is very loosely (and poorly) defined: in the Orientation paragraph you have some suggestions to use the proper Situational Awareness skill or, if not available, the Alertness skill to obtain a percentage left of a round to act in. First, Situational Awareness is not clearly defined in the rules, so the real effects of developing it are not clearly defined (and compare this fact with all of the details are in the character generation process): which situations should be covered? Why a player should expend DP?s on such a foggy skill? Then note that nothing is there to clarify what should happen if the percentage is less than 60%, the minimal percentage to declare a melee. Why I?m talking about that percentage? Because from parrying rules it seems (and I cannot say anything more) that a character is entitled to parry only if he/she declares a melee attack and the rules are really pedant in saying that the combat tables assume that you parry if you like the idea of surviving a combat.

Another example, just to name one, is about Disengaging form melee, an action that weighs 25% Activity (and that could happen often during game play). In the paragraph above the one I cited before, where it?s described how to handle Conflicting Actions, there?s an example where an Orc near a window is in melee with Naug; and the example is there to demonstrate how to handle the fact that the Orc wants to flee the melee jumping out the window while Naug would prefer to stab him with the sword. Nowhere in the example is anything about Disengaging from melee and how should it work. 

I do not know if I?ve been clear: if you compare the way RMSS links together all of the game elements to the way it does D&D, you could understand better what I mean: in D&D if there?s something in the rules (and, above all, something that a player has to choose or discard, like the skills or the talents) it has clear and detailed effects somewhere and somehow during play; otherwise it?s not in the rules at all. Rolemaster has better attack resolution mechanics, better spell casting mechanics, better skill development mechanics (than D&D) but the real details that govern how to link them in the flow of the game it?s up to the Gamemaster? 

On one hand you can find percentages of round activities to get up from a kneeling position and on the other hand it seems that the way combat are really played is like ?ok, you have met three orcs; you take the first one and you the other two; let?s roll for initiative; everyone here declares a press and melee attack (so neither bonuses nor penalties); wow you have been the quicker, roll your attack; you have achieved a critical! Etc??.

Is this the way players play Rolemaster? How can you expends days in moulding your character and then keep playing like this? And on the other hand, to avoid this inconvenience, how much work is left on the shoulder of the GM to amend all of this lack of precision?

If this is not the way Rolemaster is played I would like to have a clear description of how it's (supposed to be) played.

I hope to have conveyed an idea; my aim is not to badly criticize the game; my aim is to try to explain what I would do to make the game better: I would even accept a companion: an ?official? work that states clearly how things should go in details for the best result. I mean how things should go the way the game has been deigned. If the game designers put a skill they thought at specific effects in specific situations: please write them clearly. And get rid of all of the game elements that have no a specific clear effect in the rules. 

Greetings,
Alessandro

[Temujin]

I think your criticism is quite fair and well worded.  I would say that School of Hard Knocks is the fix to all your problems and worries about skills: The detailed system in there could hardly be better, and you'll no longer have to worry about a skill on your list of skill which doesn't have a description (except perhaps some obscure crafts, but you can always refer to other craft skills for them).  It really is an essential book imho, much more so than say, Gamemaster Law.

Its unfortunate to say however, that yes, your criticism of the combat resolution mechanisms (and in particular, action % and different phases, etc.) is quite clumsy, and there lacks clarity there.

[RandalThor]

I think that the reason there isn't a defined way to go from narrative to detailed game-play is that each situation would demand it's own method so there can be no one way to do it - hence the GM needing to make the decision.

For example:

You (Raug) and your mortal enemy (Maug) have just stepped into the inn hallway from your respective rooms and have seen each other at the same time - roll initiative go to detailed game-play.

You (Sniphth) are an assassin who has trailed his target (City Councilwoman, Meerhi) until you got your chance to get 'im! She hasn't noticed you (you think) so you go for it. No initiative roll don't go to detailed game-play (yet).

I hope this is what you were referring to, as it is what I got from your post. I firmly believe that not everything needs to have a rule attached to it and that some things should be in the hands of the GM. There should be some arbatration so that there can be some flexibility. Games that have no flexibility do not appeal to me, too much.

I totally agree with you about character generation - I call it the 3D character. When I am done with making my character they feel 3D to me, whereas other game's characters do not. I love that. If it takes me longer to make a character in RM - so what?!? The character is can imagine more - see them in my mind better, if you will - than the others.

BTW: Welcome to the ICE Boards and community! Huzzahh!

[Doridian]

I would say that School of Hard Knocks is the fix to all your problems and worries about skills:

Thank you for the suggestion. It is compatible with RMSS, isn't it? I suppose I'll get one copy as soon as possible (maybe from the online store if they mail to Italy)
I would like to add that I think that RM does not need a redesign: it only needs to have some points better integrated and defined (read ahead after the following quote).
 

I firmly believe that not everything needs to have a rule attached to it and that some things should be in the hands of the GM. There should be some arbatration so that there can be some flexibility. Games that have no flexibility do not appeal to me, too much.

For sure it is a matter of tastes and every taste is respectful in its own way. And for sure I do not pretend that everything should have a rule for it. But I think that a little bit more regarding resolving combat and action rounds would be a real improvement of the game. Let me give a further example (probably with the Skill Companion at hand things will appear different, but I cannot know by now).

1) The Ambush skill description (A1.28 from the RMSR) says that "a character must approach his foe undected and be able to strike before the foe can react".
2) The Quickness Stat modification to DB (23.2.7) is factored (x3) in the DB of a character only "if he is aware that he is in a combat situatuion and is free to move"
3) In table T-3.5 we can see that a Surprise Attack yelds a +20 to the OB of the Attacker
4) Surprise is handled in 18.2.10 where nothing is said about how you get surprised but it's suggested that "a surprised character" is allowed "to take only one deliberate action" and "the actual % activity allowed should range from 0 to 100% based upon an Orientation roll (see 21.4)".
5) 21.4 tells us how to handle confusing actions and which skill should be used in the Orientation roll.

For sure anyone would say that all of the five bullets are somehow related to each other. But it's not really clear because, apart from the plain link between 4) and 5), there is not any explicit, formal set of definitions that links them in any way. So, for example, I could guess that when I can apply my Ambush skill I can also get the +20 to the Attack for Surprise and also that my target will not get his Quickness factored in the DB. But, is it always true? Or, maybe, it is not always true? And should I guess that when 2) does not hold true then I should be entitled to apply 1)? Or not? And could I infer that a character is Surprised if the Orientation roll gives a really low result? Could it be also that an Ambush can happen only if the Orientation is low enough? Or, at the opposite, if you can apply Ambush then no Orientation should be allowed (i.e. automatic 0% result)?

I repeat that it is a matter of tastes. I like D&D (I would never have said that twenty years ago, when I used to be the GM in Middle Earth with first edition RM first and soon with RM2, playing every week more than two evenings a week...) because the things above are clearly defined in the rules.

For instance Ambush (the thieves' special attack bonus to damage) can be applied every time Agility cannot be added to the Armor (the 1. above is defined not based on detection but it is defined based on 2.). When the game makes a transition from narrative to action rounds, the awareness of all of the characters involved is checked and who is not aware is surprised and loses the Agility bonus to the armor and this holds true until the first active initiative (and so any attack from a thief in the meantime qualifies for the "Ambush" bonus). Etc..

I do not think that these things are details that can be left up to the GM. How combat is paced in a game that has a table for each separate weapon cannot be left so vague.

It is also simply a matter of rule organization. Think at positional modifiers and that they are by the rules cumulative each other (without any plain rationale: it's hard to me to explain why a rear attack is cumulative with a flank attack... It's even worse to me to understand why a Surprise is a Position...). If you turn to the Martial Arts Companion and the All Around Attack feature that you can buy in a Combat Style, you'll read that the penalty to attack aside or through the rear without turning is double the Position bonus: attacking from the rear would accrue a penalty of -50 (minus double +25); but (RMSR 23.3.4 and even from RM2) a non-surprise rear attack gets a position bonus of +35; shouldn't it be -70 the penalty to the All Round Attack then? Or shouldn't it be appropriate here a note to explain a little bit more? Maybe even the author of the Martial Arts Companion made a little bit confusion? In my opinion the rules, in the main mechanics, should not have this kind of ambiguities.

Ok; I stop here because I'm getting tedious; excuse me!

But, the good thing is that now I can turn to the Skill Companion and I'll do it full of good hopes.

Ciao,
Alessandro

P.S.:

BTW: Welcome to the ICE Boards and community! Huzzahh!

Thank you! I'm eagerly waiting to play again to RMSS; so I've started to study the books all over again...

[markc]

 Yes Welcome to the boards.

 I agree that something can use a better explanation or more examples. To me more examples is rarely a wast and I like to see almost 1 example per major rule or statement.

 One thing I can point you to is the combined RM ruleings on Brents Basement ; http://icewebring.com/gaming_errata.php and at the Guild Comaanion here http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2001/jun/ . I have not taken a indepth look at the two so I cannot compair them.
 Another point is many of the points you brought up are probably talked about in the archive threads here on the ICE boards. A quick search migth give you a lot of info.
 About the SoHK, there is some new info but if you have RMSS you have almost all of it allready. It is a good book to have; and almost a must for RMFRP and new players but you can get away without using it or having it in your game. The SoHK does also have some new professions and rules on healing. The healing rules are explained better than in RMSS SL and some of my old groupe picket it up for that. 

 A side note I do not use Sit Aware since I myself think that other skills in the system refleect what it does. I use Awareness or Observation and give mods to it if a profession say it gets it as a E,O,R skill. For example Situation Scouting to me would be handeled by tracking, reading tracks, alertness, observation and maybe tactics. But I do agree others love the skill and use it in their games.

MDC

[RandalThor]

1) The Ambush skill description (A1.28 from the RMSR) says that "a character must approach his foe undected and be able to strike before the foe can react".
2) The Quickness Stat modification to DB (23.2.7) is factored (x3) in the DB of a character only "if he is aware that he is in a combat situatuion and is free to move"
3) In table T-3.5 we can see that a Surprise Attack yelds a +20 to the OB of the Attacker
4) Surprise is handled in 18.2.10 where nothing is said about how you get surprised but it's suggested that "a surprised character" is allowed "to take only one deliberate action" and "the actual % activity allowed should range from 0 to 100% based upon an Orientation roll (see 21.4)".
5) 21.4 tells us how to handle confusing actions and which skill should be used in the Orientation roll.

What I get from that is this:

A.) If you are Ambushed you are surprised (though not always the reverse, as Ambush is a specific skill and Surprise is a situation) - hence you get no DB and the attacker gets a +20 OB. Ultimately this means you are very likely going to get seriously messed up... [In the words of Jackie Chan in Jackie Chan Adventures / cartoon' "Bad day! Bad Day!"] Also, after the attack - and everyone else who is not surprised goes - you get to act (if you can).

B.) Surprised is a situation that can occur when something happens (it doesn't have to be an attack) that you did not know or sense (see, hear, smell, feel, whatever). For the most part, the skill Alertness is used to determine whether-or-not you notice, though sometimes other Awareness skills will be used instead. [Personally, I get rid of Sense Ambush and just use Alertness.]

You can, of course, make a bunch of specific rules up to try to cover each type of possible surprise scenarios, but personally I think it is best to go on a case-by-case basis and use the skills appropriate to the situation. (Situational Awareness: Combat, Sight, Hearing, Smell, Alertness, Sense Ambush, Situational Awareness: Tavern*, whatever...)

The more you do it yourself, the better you will get and be able to not have to look up rules and modifiers as much. Of course, as it has been pointed out to me by my numbers-and-rules loving friend, I am a narrative gamer, I care more about the story than the rules and will ignore, change, and generally run rough-shod all over the rules as I see fit. 


*Just incase you did not get it: This was a joke on the proliferation of skills in RM.

[Doridian]

Thank you Mark and thank you RandalThor.
I'll go through the archive of past posts. Yet I would add a final consideration. Sometimes I've heard the impression that Rolemaster is less played than D&D because the latter is simpler. I do not know if it's effectively true (that D&D is more widespread), but I can assure that D&D is not as simpler than RM as you could think... If anyone is interested in improving RM I think that he/she should not tackle this question: why D&D is played more than Rolemaster even if it is complex the same and in several points is even worse?
Greetings,
Alessandro

[rdanhenry]

Actually, Situational Awareness: Tavern would be an excellent skill for a bartender to develop.

[Arioch]

It is compatible with RMSS, isn't it? I suppose I'll get one copy as soon as possible (maybe from the online store if they mail to Italy)

Yes, it is. And ICE ships books to Italy, but sometimes books take a looooong time to arrive (italian mail service?). You can also check Redglove's online store (they're those who have the rights to sell/distribute/translate ICE's products in Italy), it seems that they still have some SoHK copy.

http://www.redglove.it/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=25&Itemid=70


Edit: BTW there's also an italian RM/HARP forum on Redglove's site 

[markc]

Thank you Mark and thank you RandalThor.
I'll go through the archive of past posts. Yet I would add a final consideration. Sometimes I've heard the impression that Rolemaster is less played than D&D because the latter is simpler. I do not know if it's effectively true (that D&D is more widespread), but I can assure that D&D is not as simpler than RM as you could think... If anyone is interested in improving RM I think that he/she should not tackle this question: why D&D is played more than Rolemaster even if it is complex the same and in several points is even worse?
Greetings,
Alessandro

 Yes I do agree that your question is important; why do more people play D&D then RM? I think there are a number of reasons why but the big one IMO is just plain old more money. D&D has benifeted from Magic the Gathering success and has a much larger staff than ICE. [I do not know the exzact numbers as I am a volentier moderator]

MDC 

[RandalThor]

Another reason D&D is more popular is because of the name recognition. You say "D&D" and just about everyone knows what you are talking about (somewhat in the case of non-gamers).

[Langthorne]

Another reason D&D is more popular is because of the name recognition. You say "D&D" and just about everyone knows what you are talking about (somewhat in the case of non-gamers).

Usually when someone (a non gamer) asks me "What is Rolemaster?" my (short) answer would be something like "It's like D&D, but much better".

[rdanhenry]

I do not believe I have ever seen a Rolemaster book in a major chain bookstore. (I did see a MERP module or two a long time ago.) D&D is in Borders, Barnes & Noble, whatever else is sitting in the local mall. There's very little other than d20/D&D stuff at the chain book stores, where those who don't seek out the little FLGS get exposed to RPG materials and maybe pick up some books to try with their friends to see what it's all about.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I do not believe I have ever seen a Rolemaster book in a major chain bookstore. (I did see a MERP module or two a long time ago.) D&D is in Borders, Barnes & Noble, whatever else is sitting in the local mall. There's very little other than d20/D&D stuff at the chain book stores, where those who don't seek out the little FLGS get exposed to RPG materials and maybe pick up some books to try with their friends to see what it's all about.

That would be because it is almost suicidal for a small company to try to get into the book store market. Bookstore distributors often make large orders, don't pay for 60-90 days and then right before Christmas will return everything on their shelves (and expect a full, immediate refund!!) just to make their end of year inventories look better.

This is exactly what happened to Guardians of Order a few years ago, causing them all sorts of problems.

[Langthorne]

I do not believe I have ever seen a Rolemaster book in a major chain bookstore. (I did see a MERP module or two a long time ago.) D&D is in Borders, Barnes & Noble, whatever else is sitting in the local mall. There's very little other than d20/D&D stuff at the chain book stores, where those who don't seek out the little FLGS get exposed to RPG materials and maybe pick up some books to try with their friends to see what it's all about.

That would be because it is almost suicidal for a small company to try to get into the book store market. Bookstore distributors often make large orders, don't pay for 60-90 days and then right before Christmas will return everything on their shelves (and expect a full, immediate refund!!) just to make their end of year inventories look better.

This is exactly what happened to Guardians of Order a few years ago, causing them all sorts of problems.

I don't think anyone is suggesting here that ICE is in a position to 'take on D&D/d20'. I think it is more a case of answering the question "Why is D&D so popular when Rolemaster/HARP etc are, in so many ways, much better games?"

Money, exposure, and 'being the first', make D&D loom large in the general consciousness - and none of this is because of any deficiency on the part of other game companies/systems (and there is very little they can do about it).

What can ICE do? Pretty much exactly what it is doing - produce (viable) quality games, (from a business perspective) try to only work on productive projects, and hope that the message spreads.


 

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I don't think anyone is suggesting here that ICE is in a position to 'take on D&D/d20'.

Didn't think anybody was. However, I did want to "nip in the bud" calls for us to get our books in Barnes & Noble (which we would love to do, if it weren't corporate suicide for us).

[markc]

Out here in Portland,OR there is a big book store called Powells and they have a varied selection do to the fact that they buy used stuff. 

[RandalThor]

Usually when someone (a non gamer) asks me "What is Rolemaster?" my (short) answer would be something like "It's like D&D, but much better".

Right, but you are still saying "D&D" for that.

[David Johansen]

A while back Clash Bowlery of Better Mouse Trap games asked me why people had heard of Rolemaster and ICE but not his games and company.  The context of the conversation was complex but I think my answer is simple and pertinant to the original question.

Rolemaster was advertised inside Dragon magazine's front cover for years and years.

Now when you realize that Rolemaster's recognition comes from a magazine that was mainly a house organ for D&D you'll realize that D&D is naturally more popular.

Especially considering how much of the customer base now is the same customers who were reading Dragon back then.