Topic: RMC or RMSS/RMFRP in my perspective...

[Elton Robb]

who's got fingernails left, I was eating my fingertips.

Yoh.

[Elton Robb]

I can certainly see that as well.  Though, the guys I usually game with put so much effort into their characters outside the technical aspects that they still value them pretty highly.  No matter what system we use (from simple to complex) they still start sharpening their axes when I kill off a character.

Now that's funny, GoblynByte.  I don't know whether to praise them or chasten them.  Fortunately, they aren't my players. 

Oh, and the spreadsheet does make everything easier.  I wondered if a Spreadsheet might help D&D character creation; but this group says that RMSS/RMFP/RMC is so simple, but the character creation so detailed, that a spreadsheet really does help.

D&D's so simple yet so complex that a Spreadsheet would get in the way.  That's just the facts of life.  Mechanically, RMC/RMSS/RMFRP is the exact opposite of D&D.

[GoblynByte]

Oh, and the spreadsheet does make everything easier.  I wondered if a Spreadsheet might help D&D character creation; but this group says that RMSS/RMFP/RMC is so simple, but the character creation so detailed, that a spreadsheet really does help.

D&D's so simple yet so complex that a Spreadsheet would get in the way.  That's just the facts of life.  Mechanically, RMC/RMSS/RMFRP is the exact opposite of D&D.

I think you're right about this.  D&D puts its complexity on the other end.  Character creation is simple to the point of being bland (one fighter isn't fundamentally any different from another), but combat is complex without really being all that interesting.

The Rolemaster family is very different.  Character creation is more involved (the degree of which depending on which version you're using), but far more interesting.  Combat, in one respect, is very complex to the point of taking advantage of a lot of tactical detail, which makes if very, very interesting and exciting, but it's charts are a double edged sword.  They make combat easier by having the charts do all the calculations for you, but then you end up with 25+ combat charts to wade through, but at its fundamental core concept the RM mechanic is very, very simple.

[markc]

One thing I have done is take a spread sheet and put the skills on one side and numberrs accross the top. In each cell I write when I bought the skill, ie a=adol, 1= 1st, Tp=# = Training Package name, A=Apprentiship, G=GM, B=Book. It makes it very easy to recreate the character and see just how many ranks you have where. And better yet it works without a computer. In fact many of my players did thier level ups and then I put them into the computer to check them out and make sure the numbers jive.
MDC

[GoblynByte]

One thing I have done is take a spread sheet and put the skills on one side and numberrs accross the top. In each cell I write when I bought the skill, ie a=adol, 1= 1st, Tp=# = Training Package name, A=Apprentiship, G=GM, B=Book. It makes it very easy to recreate the character and see just how many ranks you have where. And better yet it works without a computer. In fact many of my players did thier level ups and then I put them into the computer to check them out and make sure the numbers jive.
MDC

Hmmm...that's interesting.  I'll have to try that out too.  It sounds pretty simple.

How do you factor skill catagories into that?  Have a collum in skills for "catagory" rank, I suppose?

[markc]

 I have a seperate page for the categories. But you can work out a sheet with categories and skills underneath writen in.
 It does make a huge diffeence. I joined a new group that plays HARP and they love how I do it.

MDC

[David Johansen]

As an interesting addition to this thread I may have pinned down the one aspect that frustrates me about RMSS when compared to RM2.  It's the skill catagories.  To me this seems like a rather needless step to character creation that only serves to make skill management more of a task.

So...a mechanic that reduces the number of skill cost listings and stat bonus computations to a managable level is a needless complication?

The main problem I see with skill categories is that it can be hard for players to remember which skill came out of which category (frankly I'd reduce the number of categories to about half if I had my druthers)

There's an easy solution that came to me today and I've been kicking myself for not having thought of it earlier.

Just put a line in for a heading that separates each category on the skill list!

Doh!

Also, you silly kids and your computers.  It's not hard math, just a fair bit of it.

But then I've always favoured not totaling skills that aren't likely to come up much and letting players total bonuses while their character is indisposed.

"Shut up and total a few bonuses" That's my mantra.

[Fenrhyl Wulfson]

Rolemaster actually dramatically improved my mental calculation abilities.

Rolemaster : bringing your mind to new levels since 1982.

[PiXeL01]

When I started playing SPAM I made a combined sheet which have the skills written under each of the catagories. Makes it alot easier to remember your catagory and to develop it actually

I do agree on that in RMFRP/SPAM it seems to take a lot longer to create a character. It seems a lot more complex than RM2, which I play when not doing SPAM, which is based on RMSS. The newer versions do have some nice ideas, but maybe I am too stuck on things I know and like to move on to something else. Ealier versions seems earlier, though the books can be somewhat complicated to find information in.

They have fixed this in the RMC books, a lovely thing to say the least, so I have been playing to continue to do rm2, gthough through the help of RMC books ... Maybe one day the change will be complete

[smug]

One thing I do like about RMSS, which is also something that existed in MERP and is one of my favorite features of HARP, is the fact that adolescent skills are based on race/culture rather than DPs.  If you don't take DPs so literally it isn't a problem, but I just think basing them on race/culture has a certain "flavor" benefit that I really like.  I'm not sure how RMC handles this (in comparison to RM2), but I think it might be a pretty easy thing to insert.  It would be far easier to insert that instead of removing skill catagories from RMSS.

I added it to the standard two-stage RM2 start process, tossed them some extra free ranks in culturally determined skills (occasionally with some free choice), normally including some weapon skill or other (depending on culture/status; some don't get any). Given that some people choose to start their RM characters at third level anyhow, it didn't seem like that big a deal to me, given that it only happens at the front end.

[GoblynByte]

So...a mechanic that reduces the number of skill cost listings and stat bonus computations to a managable level is a needless complication?

An added layer.  Yes.  It may make costs more managable, but it makes skill record keeping a pain in the but.  With a proper character sheet it isn't quite so bad, but why go through the hassle?  The way I see it, have either the skills, or the skill catagories.  Not both.  Sorry.

The main problem I see with skill categories is that it can be hard for players to remember which skill came out of which category

Exactly.  It just makes skill management more complex, I think.

But then I've always favoured not totaling skills that aren't likely to come up much and letting players total bonuses while their character is indisposed.

With RMSS you almost have to.  That's why they have that list of "frequently used skills" on the first page of the character sheet.  Even with the simple skill system of HARP I usually only add up the skills to which I apply ranks.  But, for me, the problem isn't totalling up the skills.  That's the easy part...just busy work.  It's the application of DPs and ranks, while splitting your attention between skills and catagories that just seems like wasted effort.  I mean, why the catagories in the first place?  I'm not trying to bait anyone, I honestly can't see the benefit.  Ya know?

[David Johansen]

The beef I have with categories is the ones that contain a single skill.  I love the separation it's one of the features that makes the game for me.

On the other hand, I'd probably have one armour category, melee, and missile.  With all special attacks and combat maneuvres falling under melee or missile.

[markc]

 IMO the idea of categories is a way to handel skill synergy, without a chart. If you add a new skill you have the synergy built in.
 IMO it is vastly superior to RM2 skill system and it is the reason I switched to RM from RuneQuest. Yes it is a bit more complicated but again if your game requires that level of detail you have it. It is much tougher to add detail to a simple system than to take it away from a more complicated one.
MDC

[yammahoper]

IMO the idea of categories is a way to handel skill synergy, without a chart. If you add a new skill you have the synergy built in.

Agree.  To lazy to type it, however

lynn

[markc]

I can also say I am happy to just see people play the game in any of its forms. I reciently moved to OR from CA and I am very suprised at how many gamers thier are in my area. Where as in CA thier were not as many and it was tough to get a group that meshed well.
MDC

[Fenrhyl Wulfson]

I started gathering players for a group. I ended up with (GASP) 15 applications !

Looks like i am the only RM gamemaster south of Paris. Scary.

[markc]

I started gathering players for a group. I ended up with (GASP) 15 applications !

Looks like i am the only RM gamemaster south of Paris. Scary.

Good job! Time to teach someone eles to GM and you can have 2 groups. Or run 1 campain with one side good and the other evil, and see who wins out in the end.

MDC

[GoblynByte]

IMO the idea of categories is a way to handel skill synergy, without a chart. If you add a new skill you have the synergy built in.

That's a good point.  As a player I suppose you could even just develop catagories and not skills.  That might even be a good way of getting general, mook NPCs done a bit faster.  I mean, would their be a huge difference in cost efficiency if you just developed catagories instead of skills?

[dutch206]

GoblinByte,

Culture-based skill ranks for adolescence was an option mentioned in Rolemaster Companion I, but nothing ever became of it.

[Marc R]

Category ranks + static profession bonuses ends up serving the same function as progressive level bonueses in RM2.

While an RM2 fighter gets +3 level in weapon skills for life, a RMSS fighter starts with +20 then purchases ranks in "weapon category X" to get the rest.

It does allow for a bit more customization than fixed bonuses, since you can choose where to spend your category ranks, but in the end 90% of spend is done within archetype, so the end result is the same, with a bit more paperwork.

Offering an example:
1) Take RMC using the "RMFRP friendly skill categories" option.
2) Give all players +30 DP per level.
3) Characters start at 1st level with fixed 5th level level bonuses. So +1 = +5 bonus, +2 = +10 bonus, +3 = +15 bonus and +3 open ended (Fighter "Combat" bonus) = +20 bonus.
4) Players must purchase all further level bonuses each level at 3 DP per +1.
5) Players must buy +10 in bonus each level.

There would be a slight variation in the bonus per ranks level compared to RMSS, and how diminishing returns affects that level bonus, but that seems to be essentially the concept behind RMSS category bonuses in a nutshell, from my point of view.

It's neither a good nor a bad thing, I'm just not sure that it's the best way to achieve the end result desired. (It's certainly infinitely better than "Similar skills".)