Official ICE Forums
Systems & Settings => Rolemaster => Topic started by: HorusArisen on June 13, 2018, 03:44:38 AM
-
What’s happening with Rolemaster?
I was expecting the new edition about 10 years ago (slight exaggeration).
Will we see this old girl resurrected soon? Or is she destined to be an archived classic?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
The directors briefings in the last few months have been talking about the 'Rolemaster Singularity', when the text of the core books is ready to advance to the next stage of the publication process. It sounds like Nicholas is expecting that soon -- he is saying things like, 'it didn't happen this month', which suggests it is not too far away. You can see this in the director's briefings in the 'ICE News and Discussion' section of this forum.
-
The directors briefings in the last few months have been talking about the 'Rolemaster Singularity', when the text of the core books is ready to advance to the next stage of the publication process. It sounds like Nicholas is expecting that soon -- he is saying things like, 'it didn't happen this month', which suggests it is not too far away. You can see this in the director's briefings in the 'ICE News and Discussion' section of this forum.
As in the may Briefing they stated that the singularity did not happen. And the July Briefing there was only silence, is this the hope we are looking for that it could happen soon? .. Oh how i can dream
-
As in the may Briefing they stated that the singularity did not happen. And the July Briefing there was only silence, is this the hope we are looking for that it could happen soon? .. Oh how i can dream
Yes, I noticed that they did not mention RMU in the more recent briefing too, but from all we've heard, JDale and the rest of the team are still hard at work on it. I didn't want to keep nagging them, especially since I've been asking for some clarifications and updates to be made to the action economy rules, and that would take time. But I do think it is fair to say that the rules as a whole are in a very advanced stage, and I think we are approaching the end of the development process, at least as far as the text of the rules is concerned.
-
Yes, I noticed that they did not mention RMU in the more recent briefing too, but from all we've heard, JDale and the rest of the team are still hard at work on it. I didn't want to keep nagging them, especially since I've been asking for some clarifications and updates to be made to the action economy rules, and that would take time. But I do think it is fair to say that the rules as a whole are in a very advanced stage, and I think we are approaching the end of the development process, at least as far as the text of the rules is concerned.
and here i am, nagging on you..
Btw, do you know how it will be with the books, is there a way to reserve a copy (all of them).
i've only played RMU beta for <2 years and love to lead a group.
*also planning on sitting down and writing a "character creation" program with ability print and easy damage tables.. but that will be a future thing*
-
There are already a fair number of character creators for RMU; check the downloads sections of these boards. I've used the ones by Shorn and JessicaEwers, and they are both good.
I can't answer your other questions about reserving copies; I have no connection to the development team and am just a humble forum member like yourself.
Welcome to the boards though!
-
Thanks for the response. Disappointing that there’s no firm schedule. I have fond memories of Merp and RM.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
I'm guessing that ERA will have an RMU module added to it at some point after the "Singularity."
-
What’s the singularity?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
The point when all the chaos collides and creates a single new truth.
-
What’s the singularity?
Hurin mentioned it here. http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=18630.msg223799#msg223799
It's how they are describing their big milestone in their prep for the next edition of Rolemaster.
The point when all the chaos collides and creates a single new truth.
That's certainly one way to put it. :P
-
I'm guessing that ERA will have an RMU module added to it at some point after the "Singularity."
Of course!
You'll get all races, professions, attack and critical tables, talents, flaws, complete spell lists with descriptions, and some specific steps for RMU character creation!
-
And now about 5 months later and the Singularity has not (as far as i know) happend. Does anyone know the progression?
I see they mentioned the Creature law had some work.
-
I think they are still trying to slay the giant dragon that is Creature Law.
-
How much does it differ from RM2? It sounds like a major overhaul.
James
-
Yes, it is a major overhaul. On the plus side, that is an opportunity to fix some of the things that were broken about RM2 (e.g. AT 1 being so good). But yes, this is a major overhaul.
-
How much does it differ from RM2? It sounds like a major overhaul.
James
RM2 and RMSS have differences, but are close enough you can usually easily convert things.
RMSS and RMFRP are almost exactly the same.
RMC is a throwback to RM2 with some minor changes.
RMU, upcoming, is more a departure than any other. It's not done, so one can't say too much, but converting things won't be near as easy from what I've seen, sometimes even in hidden ways you may not catch.
-
Thanks. I started gaming with MERP & RM2 in the late 80's and ended up bypassing RMSS & RMFRP as they didn't really seem to offer anything above RM2 (and to be honest I just love RM2). It will be interesting to see how the system develops with RMU though.
James
-
It's fairly split on popularity from what I can tell. A new RM dividing the existing fan base isn't a surprise though. I don't see it being much more or less successful than the move from RM2 to RMSS or RMSS to RMFRP. A portion of the existing customer base is essentially lost each time. Those who are lost may want bits and pieces of the new one, but they'll never fully buy into it.
I think it's all going to hinge on how well you've customized your own RM, if you see value in switching and if you like the changes.
Personally I don't like most of the major changes myself and, unfortunately, enough fundamental mechanics have been altered as to make back-converting things problematic.
-
I agree with Cory on this. There's pieces of RMU that I like & might adapt to my already frankestein-like RM2 (which uses bits of RMSS) system I use. But fundamentally, I'm stuck in the RM2 mechanics that I fell in love with back in Junior High School. But I'm still following the RMU development discussions. There's lots of great ideas being suggested/tested. Until RMU is officially done & published, the entire project seems to be in a constant state of flux.
Nightblade ->--
-
RPGs are long life products. Asking your fan base to drop twenty years of optimisation and customisation and abandon a whole shelf of books just to go back to a set of core rules is an impossible ask.
A few groups, like Hurin's and Jdales, have been playing RMU for several years now and they have settled in.
Roll the clock forward and all the new shiny things are for RMU and as GMs we tend to be magpie and we always want the new things.
I think RMU will be successful but it will be a long term success. Never before were the old versions ever explicitly ended and support turned off. RM was always the one product that limped on.
-
20 years is actually a LONG time. Any system has a business life unfortunately. The best sales you make are the introduction of a new book and, when you create a new version, you are often selling multiple new books. You can only produce so much quality products before you run out of good material/writers too. Wait too long for a revamp and you start to produce mediocre products and begin to lose your base (TSR anyone?).
RM did need a revamp, for life-cycle (ran out of good material) and business (new ICE) reasons.
My opinion: The real question was do they try to retain existing customers or gain new ones? I don't think both is realistic.
- If this is more a side-hobby for the ownership then targeting the existing customer base is a good idea. Although I think RMU could have done a better job there. RMU should have taken the best aspects of RM2 and RMSS and tossed the worse aspects of both without a lot of other significant changes.
- If the ownership wants to revitalize RM and try to bring it back to its former glory, RMU needed to not cater to the existing customer base and change fairly significantly. The people still playing it weren't really the people they should have been bouncing ideas off of. It should have been people that either used to play and have moved to new, more recent, systems or people that had never played RM at all.
-
I think there will still be a lot that can be mined going forward and back. We're using spell lists from RMSS and even RM2 in addition to RMU lists, for example, and you could use RMU lists in the previous editions if you wanted to take advantage of them filling in the blanks. There are some specific types of lists which will not translate as easily (e.g. healing is different, things that affect the structure of the combat round like haste) but the majority will be fine. The presence of tools for creating races, cultures, and professions means that if you do move to RMU, you are not left on your own if you need to convert things from previous editions. Creature stats will be different but that's why the entire creature list is being converted -- just use the new ones -- and again there is a system for creating creatures if you do need to make your own. Character skill bonuses are going to change, but there are already big differences in those bonuses between RMSS and RM2/RMC, because of differences in how profession bonuses work (flat in RMSS, level based in RM2/RMC) and higher numbers of ranks in RMSS. I've also seen a fair amount of discussion about converting modules from, say, Pathfinder, and converting between RM editions is going to be way easier than that.
There are other changes like the structure of the combat round but I don't see that as difficult to house rule. Of course the more tweaking you did, the more there is to adapt, and RM2 with all the companions is more of a kit for assembling your own RPG than a fully actualized RPG....
-
I think there will still be a lot that can be mined going forward and back. We're using spell lists from RMSS and even RM2 in addition to RMU lists, for example, and you could use RMU lists in the previous editions if you wanted to take advantage of them filling in the blanks. There are some specific types of lists which will not translate as easily (e.g. healing is different, things that affect the structure of the combat round like haste) but the majority will be fine. The presence of tools for creating races, cultures, and professions means that if you do move to RMU, you are not left on your own if you need to convert things from previous editions. Creature stats will be different but that's why the entire creature list is being converted -- just use the new ones -- and again there is a system for creating creatures if you do need to make your own. Character skill bonuses are going to change, but there are already big differences in those bonuses between RMSS and RM2/RMC, because of differences in how profession bonuses work (flat in RMSS, level based in RM2/RMC) and higher numbers of ranks in RMSS. I've also seen a fair amount of discussion about converting modules from, say, Pathfinder, and converting between RM editions is going to be way easier than that.
There are other changes like the structure of the combat round but I don't see that as difficult to house rule. Of course the more tweaking you did, the more there is to adapt, and RM2 with all the companions is more of a kit for assembling your own RPG than a fully actualized RPG....
Something I would love to see is a set of acceptable rules of thumb for converting B/X to RMU so we can both convert the mountain of freely available b/x or OSR modules to RMU and use them to attract in the OSR community.
RM in all its flavours has promoted itself as an 'advanced' system and the OSR community are often the most experienced of GMs and players who go back to the 80s.
-
20 years is actually a LONG time. Any system has a business life unfortunately. The best sales you make are the introduction of a new book and, when you create a new version, you are often selling multiple new books. You can only produce so much quality products before you run out of good material/writers too. Wait too long for a revamp and you start to produce mediocre products and begin to lose your base (TSR anyone?).
RM did need a revamp, for life-cycle (ran out of good material) and business (new ICE) reasons.
My opinion: The real question was do they try to retain existing customers or gain new ones? I don't think both is realistic.
- If this is more a side-hobby for the ownership then targeting the existing customer base is a good idea. Although I think RMU could have done a better job there. RMU should have taken the best aspects of RM2 and RMSS and tossed the worse aspects of both without a lot of other significant changes.
- If the ownership wants to revitalize RM and try to bring it back to its former glory, RMU needed to not cater to the existing customer base and change fairly significantly. The people still playing it weren't really the people they should have been bouncing ideas off of. It should have been people that either used to play and have moved to new, more recent, systems or people that had never played RM at all.
You are right and we have had this discussion before in multiple threads.
I think the target audience is the existing community as ICE have made virtually zero effort to attract in play testers from outside these forums.
ICE is almost certainly a hobby. It [the company] is only making about £5000 a year. It is a difficult time for a game system like Rolemaster. If you wanted to make a commercially viable game then RMU is the exact opposite of what you would build. If you are building a system for the love of the system then RMU fits the bill nicely.
-
There are other changes like the structure of the combat round but I don't see that as difficult to house rule.
Yes, and the discussions have shown that many groups dispensed with the original RM2 round structure -- and indeed even RMSS did too -- so there isn't really any 'one round to rule them all' that you could go back to.
-
If you wanted to make a commercially viable game then RMU is the exact opposite of what you would build.
But I think if the goal was "commercially viable", you would end up with HARP. It is a heavily streamlined version of RM. That's really why HARP was created. Moving RM to be another HARP would not be a good move commercially, there's no point in making two games that compete for exactly the same niche. RM stakes a claim on the more detail-oriented end of the FRPG spectrum.
Personal opinions only, I was not part of any of the original planning for RMU.
-
If you wanted to make a commercially viable game then RMU is the exact opposite of what you would build.
But I think if the goal was "commercially viable", you would end up with HARP. It is a heavily streamlined version of RM. That's really why HARP was created. Moving RM to be another HARP would not be a good move commercially, there's no point in making two games that compete for exactly the same niche. RM stakes a claim on the more detail-oriented end of the FRPG spectrum.
Personal opinions only, I was not part of any of the original planning for RMU.
I think you are right though.
That is why I think RMU is more a labour of love and not really a commercial game. The biggest movement in RPGs for possibly the last decade is OSR which is a shift away from detail oriented FRPG. The second biggest movement games built around evocative settings and the rules developed to reflect that setting, RMU wears its generic nature with pride. Fantasy is about the most crowded genre in RPGs and completely dominated by big brands taking the lions share of sales and more indie games than you can shake a stick at, this is where RMU is choosing to compete. Finally, the average price of entry to a new game, if you exclude free 'lite' versions which are rather old fashioned these days, and free quickstart books or about 50 pages, is about $20 for a complete system in a book. RMU looks like it is intending to be a set of rule books right from the start as compressing what we have into a single volume would be a herculean task.
And another finally, assuming RMU emerges in 2019, it is going to come out and have to compete against Against The Darkmaster (vsDarkmaster). I would even say that it looks like vsDarkmaster may make it to market first and is has all the unique selling points of RMU and rolemaster, it has d100 stats, the skills, the criticals, the spell lists and the open ended rolls. What it also has is an active social media presence it could also have a bigger financial war chest depending on how its kickstarter goes, but that is yet to be seen.
There is nothing wrong with RMU and I would buy it tomorrow given the choice. I am fully onboard even if I will house rule the hell out of it, just like I have RM2 and RMC. I just cannot see how in this market, right now it will be a commercial 'success'.
-
I was part of the team after some basic design ideas had already been discussed but eventually bowed out for a couple major reasons. One of the two reasons was that there didn't seem to be a clear goal or consensus on what crowd it was targeting. That left me in a position where I didn't know how to help as those two possibilities would send me in very different directions.
I'm not quite sure if one direction or the other was officially chosen, but these days I'd echo it is obviously not targeting new players (even if it was intended to).
-
Yes, and the discussions have shown that many groups dispensed with the original RM2 round structure -- and indeed even RMSS did too -- so there isn't really any 'one round to rule them all' that you could go back to.
Long ago, during much earlier design discussions, there was a poll conducted here on the forums that the RMSS round won out pretty clearly. To be perfectly clear, while I use RMSS, I have no biased there as I prefer either a more or less detailed round than it (either second-by-second or a 'battletech' style round). But when choosing between the RM2 style round (unpopular), RMSS round (fairly popular), and everyone's own custom round (slightly less popular than the RMSS round and obviously an impossible task regardless), the RMSS round was the obvious choice in my opinion. I find the new round no better, only different, and possibly even a little more complex.
-
My recollection of that poll about round structure is somewhat different. I don't recall any choice winning the support of a firm majority; and i recall that many people indicated some degree of dissatisfaction with the previous options. It seemed to me most people were looking for or at least willing to try something else
But it would be good to dig those results up to see.
-
http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11535.0;viewresults (http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11535.0;viewresults)
I think this was the poll.
-
I just read that thread and basically not one person was using anything that had not been house ruled except intothatdarkness who was about to introduce house rules. :)
-
I think that's the thing. Just about everything in every version of RM has been houseruled at some point, probably (I know that's a huge sweeping statement to make, sorry). At the very least, we all use different optional rules from the various companions in both RM2/C & RMSS/FRP.
As for commercial viability, I think RM has become a niche, perhaps even just a nostalgic game. Yes, it would be great if a new crop of players picked up RM & injected some new life into the product (& ICE's coffers); but when you look at the ages of the users on this forum, they're mostly around the same age - basically all of us who have been playing RM in its various incarnations since high school. In the end, most of us will continue to use whatever homebrew ruleset we use - perhaps adopting some new mechanics/rules/options from RMU. But I get the feeling this is where the RM community is sort of headed - IMHO.
I think if ICE wants to inject new life into the RM line (no matter what flavour (C/FRP/U)) they should try to go back to what made them successful in their heyday: amazing adventure modules. I know there's no chance of getting the MERP license back; but there's Shadow World; SM Imperium; SM:Privateers & a number of other fan-created worlds. If ICE found a way to support these settings and market modules & adventures set there, I believe they could possibly find some commercial viability. But that takes dedicated authors & a team of editorial staff to keep things "Canon". I understand there's issues with such an idea, but there are only so many people out there who will get into a RPG with a generic ruleset that says: Build your own world to play in. Most people want that hard work done for them. We're just the crazy bunch that loves to build worlds. But you can't survive commercially on people like us.
Nightblade ->--
-
http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11535.0;viewresults (http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11535.0;viewresults)
I think this was the poll.
Thanks for finding that! The RMSS round made out a little better than I remembered, in all honesty, but nevertheless I think my point stands that most people use something other than the RMSS round. So there definitely is room for improvement here.
-
Thanks for finding that! The RMSS round made out a little better than I remembered, in all honesty
Pretty much the result I stated.
21 RMSS, 17 house rules, 5 RM2 and 5 RMC.
I think my point stands that most people use something other than the RMSS round. So there definitely is room for improvement here.
Actually the poll indicates MOST responders used the RMSS round. If you're going to pick a round for the revamp, it seemed the obvious one.
Your comment really just translates into 'Most people use something other than ANY Rolemaster round' and it's not possible to create a round customized for every RM user.
I don't find the new round any more elegant, it seems like a change simply for the sake of change. Technically I find it less appealing as the RMSS round allows for more versatility and requires less math.
-
Actually the poll indicates MOST responders used the RMSS round.
No, it doesn't.
Of 48 responders, more than half (27), or 56.25%, used something other than the RMSS round.
-
If you read the comments several start "I picked RMSS but..." So the poll numbers and the reality at the tables do not match up.
-
I remember sneering at the RMSS round as “what the f+++ is this garbage?!” when I first read through my purchase long, long ago - but didn’t buy it when it first came out because I wasn’t a fan of how the Category and Individual Skill ranks slowed down character creation and bloated character sheets.
All this gleaned from the old RM mailing/news lists of the day...
As said, the multitude of modules from RM2s heyday were what got me to purchase the Red Box, and later on, the Shadow World’s Atlas Box with the green and blue books inside!
It was also what made me purchase any and all RM Grey Worlds(mini RM Companions!) back issues I could find along with getting into T$R’s Dungeon Magazine(to convert adventures away!).
Nightblade has it right for getting new and old folks back into the fold at the same time - just look at the love for TKA’s unfinished Grand Campaign!
-
Actually the poll indicates MOST responders used the RMSS round.
No, it doesn't.
Of 48 responders, more than half (27), or 56.25%, used something other than the RMSS round.
Semantics. The most used round was the RMSS round. Trying to say 'most people don't use the RMSS round' is a bit of a distraction to the real point and the only reason you can even legitimately claim it is because a good number of people don't use ANY RM designed round.
If a combined total of 10 people used the RM2/RMC round, 17 used custom designed rounds, and 21 used RMSS based round the RMSS round was the obvious choice to model from. But now we have another new round modeled from RMC(?) that a bunch of people are already going to house-rule anyhow...? I'd chalk that up as a flop.
The RMSS round is a good middle ground between super detailed and super simple. Personally I don't much like half-measures, but it probably is a good starting point for the 'masses'. Course, the existing fan base isn't exactly the 'masses'. ;)
-
When you state something that is not true, the best course of action is to admit it.
It is not true that 'most responders used the RMSS round'.
It is however true that the RMSS round was the most used of the RM rounds. It is also true that a significant number of posters -- including those who used the RMSS round -- expressed dissatisfaction with their choices.
-
Did you not understand the point?
'The' most people. I think we can save the rules lawyering for the table.
-
You made the claim twice. Neither time did you put a 'the' before 'most responders', so I have no idea why you are putting 'the' in quotes now. Everyone can go check for themselves.
Is it really so hard to admit that you made an inaccurate claim? I and other posters do it all the time, rather than doubling down on something that everyone can see is not accurate.
-
I think that's the thing. Just about everything in every version of RM has been houseruled at some point, probably (I know that's a huge sweeping statement to make, sorry). At the very least, we all use different optional rules from the various companions in both RM2/C & RMSS/FRP.
As for commercial viability, I think RM has become a niche, perhaps even just a nostalgic game. Yes, it would be great if a new crop of players picked up RM & injected some new life into the product (& ICE's coffers); but when you look at the ages of the users on this forum, they're mostly around the same age - basically all of us who have been playing RM in its various incarnations since high school. In the end, most of us will continue to use whatever homebrew ruleset we use - perhaps adopting some new mechanics/rules/options from RMU. But I get the feeling this is where the RM community is sort of headed - IMHO.
I think if ICE wants to inject new life into the RM line (no matter what flavour (C/FRP/U)) they should try to go back to what made them successful in their heyday: amazing adventure modules. I know there's no chance of getting the MERP license back; but there's Shadow World; SM Imperium; SM:Privateers & a number of other fan-created worlds. If ICE found a way to support these settings and market modules & adventures set there, I believe they could possibly find some commercial viability. But that takes dedicated authors & a team of editorial staff to keep things "Canon". I understand there's issues with such an idea, but there are only so many people out there who will get into a RPG with a generic ruleset that says: Build your own world to play in. Most people want that hard work done for them. We're just the crazy bunch that loves to build worlds. But you can't survive commercially on people like us.
Nightblade ->--
Don't forget, too, that video gamers raised on sandbox games expect to have a world ready for them, and may not actually know how (yet) to design one on their own. I'm working on settings for each of the modern genre RMU variants I'm designing (three in progress now, with ideas for more), because you HAVE to provide that stuff now.
And actually once you left MERP and the SM stuff ICE's module output was pretty poor. I hope they start supporting licensed products or something similar, because RMU in any flavor won't likely survive without a solid setting and a wide range of modules or other support products. To me the key is to make it as accessible as possible with good support stuff from the beginning. Old school D&D was damned good about that, as were most of TSR's other early games (Top Secret, Boot Hill, Gamma World, Gangbusters, and so on). They all came with a setting or at least a very detailed first module right in the box.
-
I have no idea why you are putting 'the' in quotes now
You really didn't understand the original point? Really?
I find that... really hard to believe.
-
I have no idea why you are putting 'the' in quotes now
You really didn't understand the original point? Really?
I find that... really hard to believe.
The point is you made a claim that was demonstrably false. When that was demonstrated, you doubled down, refused to admit the obvious, and tried disingenuously to move the goalposts. It's a shame that you can't just admit your original claim was misleading, and correct it to something like, 'The RMSS round got considerably more votes than the RM2/RMC round.'
There is no shame in making a mistake. There is shame however in not showing your fellow posters the basic courtesy of admitting it when you do, so we don't have to waste our time pointing out the obvious.
We'll just move on without that admission though.
-
I think that IntoThatDarkness makes a good point that the module support for RMU is not going to be especially robust. This is why I feel that RMU should ensure that it is as backwards-compatible as possible, so that people don't have to do too much work to use the old Middle Earth and Shadow World modules.
Yes, I'm looking in your direction, passive skill rank bonuses!
-
So, you didn't understand the original point?
You're not intentionally being an ass, you just really are that daft?
-
So, you didn't understand the original point?
You're not intentionally being an ass, you just really are that daft?
I was waiting for you to say, 'Yes, my apologies, I did overstate my case originally. What I should say instead is that the RMSS round was more popular than the RM2/RMC round.'
You've never said anything like that. In fact, you seemed to suggest that the only difference between what you originally said and what you are saying now is 'semantics'. Again, that is not true: in no sense -- semantic, literal, figurative, or metaphorical -- is it true to say that most posters played the RMSS round.
-
So, let's recap, shall we?
I mentioned that a poll was conducted long ago in which the RMSS around seemed to be the fairly obvious round RMU should model from. That RMSS came out the clear lead, slightly behind everyone own custom round, and then far behind was RM2 and RMC.
Your incorrect 'recollection' was that this was not the case.
Someone dug up the post and we find I was spot on.
From there you degenerate into arguments akin to a petulant teenager arguing a mostly irrelevant turn of phrase because...? I don't know why. You just want to pick a fight?
I asked if you didn't understand the original point as a result. Because if someone were to use that poll to help try and determine what RM style round to model RMU from (and what other reason would the current (at the time) lead RMU designer take such a poll?) you obviously can't create a round custom to each user, RM2 and RMC were obviously not popular... which leaves what? RMSS round. Not a conclusion that requires a PHD.
How do you respond? Like the petulant teenager again.
So, I don't really know what your problem is, aside from maybe behaving exactly in the way you're trying to say I am, but you need to get the hell over it Hurin.
If you really didn't understand I'll to try and explain things at a more basic level for you in the future.
If you did understand then I can only assume your goal is to be an ass.
-
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, as he had an axe to grind'
Couldn't help myself. ;)
Seriously guys, we're all on the same side here, chatting and helping improve RM. What was perhaps a little mistake or semantics issue has blown way out of proportion. Please let's shake hands and move on?
-
I have no personal animus towards Cory, and would like very much to move forward. But his statement that 'the poll indicates MOST responders used the RMSS round' is simply incorrect, as the poll shows. For reasons I can't fathom he won't acknowledge that, and his 'recap' above adds further inaccuracies. I even suggested ways he could rephrase his claim to make it true, and tried to be nice by noting that the RMSS round was the most popular of the 'out of the box' rounds in RM. In return I've gotten insults -- 'petulant teenager' and 'ass' in particular -- which are ad hominems that I do not engage in.
If he can admit that it is incorrect to say 'the poll indicates that most responders used the RMSS round', I will happily admit that the RMSS round got the most votes (albeit not a majority). Then we can both admit that 2 + 2 = 4, and go our merry ways.
-
I think that IntoThatDarkness makes a good point that the module support for RMU is not going to be especially robust. This is why I feel that RMU should ensure that it is as backwards-compatible as possible, so that people don't have to do too much work to use the old Middle Earth and Shadow World modules.
Yes, I'm looking in your direction, passive skill rank bonuses!
This has always been essential, especially for the MERP stuff. SW has a core of devoted followers, but it simply isn't as accessible to newcomers as Middle Earth (sorry, but it's true). Unless ICE is able to create starting-level modules, or support the efforts of freelancers to do said work, you'll end up with a set of rules grounded in nothing, and that is going to be a hard sell I fear.
The "plug in" nature of RM early on was certainly a strength for a certain type of gamer, but it's also been a longstanding weakness for another type (the type that might be more common). Maybe in some ways it's better to think back to the early days when TSR had to explain what this bloody thing was (D&D) and how you use it (Greyhawk and other campaign settings like the small one done for the Basic D&D stuff).
-
What was perhaps a little mistake or semantics issue has blown way out of proportion. Please let's shake hands and move on?
Oh it was blown way out of proportion. To take 'the most used round' and 'most used the round' is what Hurin is harping on and I'm pretty darned sure he understood exactly what was meant. He's not that slow. Seeing as he refused to admit he did understand that and kept at it shows he was the one who didn't want to move forward. I think we are done there.
-
Unless ICE is able to create starting-level modules, or support the efforts of freelancers to do said work, you'll end up with a set of rules grounded in nothing, and that is going to be a hard sell I fear.
The "plug in" nature of RM early on was certainly a strength for a certain type of gamer, but it's also been a longstanding weakness for another type (the type that might be more common). Maybe in some ways it's better to think back to the early days when TSR had to explain what this bloody thing was (D&D) and how you use it (Greyhawk and other campaign settings like the small one done for the Basic D&D stuff).
This is one of the interesting developments in the RPG industry. At first, I'd say when the industry was new, modules were good for business. As time went on that became less true. I'd argue that setting materials would still have done well, providing the more experienced customer base things to work from. But maybe it was just that not a lot of quality material was being put out?
I think you really need a setting for an RPG, even if it's an extremely generic one. I also think it's a good idea to put basic adventure material in that. But I wonder if these days straight up modules are a good idea again?
-
One interesting effect that the 'plug in' nature of the original RM might have had is that it fosters a community of users who are not afraid to modify and adapt rules to their own liking. RM GMs are often kind of like videogame modders in that respect.
-
That's why I think setting materials, that can be dropped into almost any setting, with plot hook ideas (and not spelled out modules), would be where ICE should head as a baseline, with Shadow World being the possible exception to that thought.
I suspect that the supply of good authors is limited enough, and ICE small enough, that it's going to be hard to create and support a setting for every system. I think keeping up with and adopting Shadow World as official might be the best bet for RM, with freelancers here and there contributing more generic works that could be dropped into it or used on their own by GMs that have their own custom setting. I also think, moving forward, all setting materials should be dual stated for RM and HARP. There's just no reason not to IMO.
Although... digital publishing and print on demands take a lot of the risk away from ICE. The way the Channeling Companion is setup, that being that I get my royalties automatically funneled to me at the time of purchase from the distributing site, takes risk away from ICE, leaving the major issue being ensuing the material itself is quality work in the first place (you don't just want to green-light everything thrown at you). Unless there are problems Nicholas is aware of that I'm not, it'd be a win for everyone.
-
I think you really need a setting for an RPG, even if it's an extremely generic one. I also think it's a good idea to put basic adventure material in that. But I wonder if these days straight up modules are a good idea again?
It's interesting to see Paizo (and others?) selling campaign modules where, instead of the GM picking and choosing a series of modules and trying to fit them together into a coherent story, the campaign provides that whole long-term story. It's sort of half-way between module and setting. I wonder if a campaign module even needs a fully detailed setting at all. It's a lot easier to write one if the setting already exists, but if the setting is optional, a rule system not tied to a setting could offer a variety.
-
That's the balance that needs to be found, I think. Somewhere between "Everything is done for you Adventure Module" & "So Generic It Ain't Worth Adding" (as the two extremes, I guess). You're both right about the lack of risk digital ditribution offers companies. ICE can then concentrate on quality. Don't get me wrong, Shadow World is an amazing setting & I know Terry puts his heart & soul into it (as I do my own world of Nytheun). But the popular settings are backed by more than just game products (i.e. modules). Most of D&D's settings are staples of Fantasy books (Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, &c…). Terry's SW novel is a great start; but D&D's settings flourished both in fiction & in RPGs because there were mutiple authors who could increase the product output while having an editorial staff assuring continuity (for the most part). This sort of thing requires human resources: enough freelance authors & staff to create not only the game modules; but whatever medium might be chosen to support & promote the game (novels; videos; video games even…).
Though, I can understand Terry not wanting to farm out writing duties for SW. I know I'd have a hard time letting someone else write Nytheun material…
I guess that means ICE needs to find a viable way to make RMU's "genericness" a strength.
But then, that's been the conundrum since ICE lost the MERP license, I guess…
Nightblade ->--
p.s. Backward compatibility & dual stating with HARP I agree are a MUST for RMU, no matter what.
-
I think you really need a setting for an RPG, even if it's an extremely generic one. I also think it's a good idea to put basic adventure material in that. But I wonder if these days straight up modules are a good idea again?
It's interesting to see Paizo (and others?) selling campaign modules where, instead of the GM picking and choosing a series of modules and trying to fit them together into a coherent story, the campaign provides that whole long-term story. It's sort of half-way between module and setting. I wonder if a campaign module even needs a fully detailed setting at all. It's a lot easier to write one if the setting already exists, but if the setting is optional, a rule system not tied to a setting could offer a variety.
I think this concept actually started with Warhammer FRP (the whole Enemy Within series was spectacular), but GW is something of a fluke in that the RPG was a bolt-on for a successful miniatures line. Keep in mind, too, that many video gamers have been conditioned to expect strong and detailed settings with their games (Rockstar is especially good at this, but there are others as well). It doesn't have to be fully fleshed out, but the Enemy Within stuff functioned with detailed campaign module-specific stuff designed to fit into the wider scope of the world (the bones of which was included with the core rules).
I think you need at least some modules to show new gamers how the rules and system work. There's a gap now that didn't exist before, but is in many ways reminiscent of what was happening in the early days of RPGs. You can't just drop rules in peoples' laps and expect them to understand how it all fits together. Those of us who've been doing this for thirty years or so, sure.
-
What is needed is a really great reason why people who have never played RM should take a chance on the game.
Back in the 80s Arms Law in particular was unlike anything we had seen before.
-
TLTR: Supporting material....
What is needed is a really great reason why people who have never played RM should take a chance on the game.
Back in the 80s Arms Law in particular was unlike anything we had seen before.
Having followed this theme in several threads over several years now, and seeing other games coming and going, and upstarts just taking off, it's going to be one of two things. I have to admit, what caught the attention of my group back in college in the late 80's was "Wow! Check out these weapons and tables and these crits!! These are awesome!" And we were hooked.
1) Be something totally new and groundbreaking that everyone says "Whoa, check this out." (A la Weapons and really awesome crit tables. In the already flooded fantasy gaming world, that's going to be nigh impossible, but still possible.
I consider the new Star Wars FRP system groundbreaking. It has some whacky dice conventions, but it's brilliant in the use of the Force and the balance of the Force. While Star Wars is obviously not new, the use of the Force Dice certainly is. A lot of my players have been heavily invested in it and they love the system. At the last gaming session, they pulled in two more players. At our next session, one of the players is going to host Star Wars for four more new players. Just in a matter of 3 weeks, there are 6 existing players, 2 new players, and potentially 4 more new players. The players of Star Wars has just doubled in my household alone.
Devil's Staircase uses a deck of playing cards instead of dice to resolve situations in game and it's brilliant as well. I've told my gaming group about it and they are all checking it out. It's not fantasy world setting like RM, but it's Wild West and that is a rare genre, but the use of playing cards is so different from dice, we're all interested in trying it out.
2) Have really interesting supporting material out there that grabs the attention of players.
This is simple math. There are 1, maybe 2 core books hidden amongst dozens of dozens of other core books for all the different systems. Players look at the cover and maybe flip the book over to read the back, or they maybe see the title pop up in a long list of names on several pages on a computer screen. If we (RM players) are lucky, the viewer will click the name to see what it means. Right off the bat, RM Universal doesn't sound appealing to me so I am not going click it. I don't want another universal system, I want something dedicated and focused. I have GURPS for a universal system. I don't need a second universal system. Given that, I may never get far enough to see the really cool features RMU offers; the armour classes, the weapon choices, the details, the professions, the spell lists, the crits, oh the lovely crits!
What does catch my eye though, is when I scroll through a list online and I see Shadow World: Jaiman, Shadow World: Haalkatain, Shadow World: Quelbourne, Shadow World: World Atlas, Shadow World: Insert Name Here.... I look at those titles and think "What is this Shadow World? There are a string of books for it. Oh, it's a set of add-ons for RMU? What the heck is RMU? Must be pretty popular to have this much supporting material.
Instead of hoping to see "RMU Core book" standing out in a sea of titles, I see a dozen Shadow World titles peppering my screen and I can't help but notice. One of those Shadow World books may really pique my interest. If I really want to use it, I need RMU. Hmmm, maybe I should see what RMU is.
It's just my opinion and thought process, but ask yourself, how many times have you gone through Amazon or RPGNow looking for something new? What catches your eye? Maybe one really cool looking name in a list of other really cool looking names, or seeing lots of support material with a same prefix in the title that supports a game system?
-
It's a shame what happened to the Middle Earth license, because that is another thing that really could hook players in: seeing some of those old Angus McBride covers and realizing you could play Rolemaster in Middle Earth. Yes, there is a new Middle Earth game and yes, I know the license is never coming back. It is just a shame.
Spectre, can you explain how the force dice work? And the whole balance of the Force? I am intrigued.
-
TLTR: Supporting material....
What is needed is a really great reason why people who have never played RM should take a chance on the game.
Back in the 80s Arms Law in particular was unlike anything we had seen before.
Right off the bat, RM Universal doesn't sound appealing to me so I am not going click it. I don't want another universal system, I want something dedicated and focused. I have GURPS for a universal system. I don't need a second universal system. Given that, I may never get far enough to see the really cool features RMU offers; the armour classes, the weapon choices, the details, the professions, the spell lists, the crits, oh the lovely crits!
It is my understanding that RMU will not be called RMU or Rolemaster Universal when it is released, it will simply be 'Rolemaster".
-
It is my understanding that RMU will not be called RMU or Rolemaster Universal when it is released, it will simply be 'Rolemaster".
Sadly... they may be worse. Immediately, that is going to trigger all the old stereotypes with no indicator that there have been major changes across the board and this is a new, revamped, very much streamlined version of RM.
Older generation players will see Rolemaster and immediately joke about Chartmaster and remember (inaccurately) the books of all the rules you have to have. (All those books were optional rules, but no outsiders seem to want to listen to that part.) New players may just gloss over it.
Another issue it's going to cause is the confusion with the existing books and which Companion goes to which flavor of RM. Last year, I had two players purchase the incorrect books when I told them repeatedly they needed 2nd ed. They ended up buying Classic books thinking "It wasn't FRP or SS so I thought it was correct." We've already seen there hasn't been much in the way of simple backwards compatibility, which is fine. If we are going to start over, then let's start over completely.
I truly hope there is going to be something to not only set it apart from the other games, but also within the RM family of games. We already had Rolemaster and Rolemaster.
Unified?
United?
Simplified?
Phoenix?
Rerolled?
Sterling?
Platinum?
5e? (It seems to work for another RPG :) )
Hurin, I agree completely. RM could have ridden the renewed interest in Middle Earth from all of the movies in recent past. It would have been a perfect hook, then gradually release TKA's Shadow World to give players another realm to explore.
-
Maybe simply Rolemaster: Fourth Edition.
It isn't maybe as sexy as some alternatives, but it has become industry standard, with both DnD and Pathfinder (the two big systems) using numerical editions. It also helps clarify the earlier RM editions (I am counting RM1 as First Edition; 2 and Classic as Second Edition; and then RMSS and FRP as essentially a Third Edition). Naming it Fourth Edition also shows it has ties to earlier editions, suggesting that with a bit of work, you can use all your old modules with the new rules.
-
Maybe simply Rolemaster: Fourth Edition.
It isn't maybe as sexy as some alternatives, but it has become industry standard, with both DnD and Pathfinder (the two big systems) using numerical editions. It also helps clarify the earlier RM editions (I am counting RM1 as First Edition; 2 and Classic as Second Edition; and then RMSS and FRP as essentially a Third Edition). Naming it Fourth Edition also shows it has ties to earlier editions, suggesting that with a bit of work, you can use all your old modules with the new rules.
Don't you mean 6th Edition, to the snappy 6e, we could get that trade marked in advance.
1st ed and RM2 are self explanatory,
3rd is RMSS
4th is RMFRP
5th is RMC
5.5 is RMX
6th is RMU
-
Rolemaster. Remastered.
-
Don't you mean 6th Edition, to the snappy 6e, we could get that trade marked in advance.
1st ed and RM2 are self explanatory,
3rd is RMSS
4th is RMFRP
5th is RMC
5.5 is RMX
6th is RMU
I was thinking "6e is sex-y" 8)
Rolemaster. Remastered.
I love it!
-
Rolemaster Sexy would stand out in a games list.
-
Rolemaster Sexy would stand out in a games list.
So would Sexy Rolemaster, and it might even drum up extra sales from Kink Club folks around the World, too!
;D
-
Rolemaster Sexy would stand out in a games list.
So would Sexy Rolemaster, and it might even drum up extra sales from Kink Club folks around the World, too!
;D
WRONG ROLE PLAYING GAME!!!! LOL :whip:
-
Rolemaster Sexy would stand out in a games list.
So would Sexy Rolemaster, and it might even drum up extra sales from Kink Club folks around the World, too!
;D
WRONG ROLE PLAYING GAME!!!! LOL :whip:
Boxed set comes with a roll of suran wrap!
I kinda like Rolemaster Remastered.
-
Rolemaster shouldn't be released. The revision should be completed, then paired down and customized to a setting like Cyradon and the resulting game should be released as it's own title. You can add the "powered by the Rolemaster engine" blurb if you want. As was the original plan years and years ago. Revise the rules, release them as part of a creative work (a copyrightable asset) and develop support products. Rebuild the RM brand not by waiving the RM flag, but by using it as part of new and interesting creative game worlds.
-
Rolemaster shouldn't be released. The revision should be completed, then paired down and customized to a setting like Cyradon and the resulting game should be released as it's own title. You can add the "powered by the Rolemaster engine" blurb if you want. As was the original plan years and years ago. Revise the rules, release them as part of a creative work (a copyrightable asset) and develop support products. Rebuild the RM brand not by waiving the RM flag, but by using it as part of new and interesting creative game worlds.
Rolemaster as a game engine, not a game in its own right.
I totally agree with you but I think we could be a very small minority.
-
Rolemaster shouldn't be released. The revision should be completed, then paired down and customized to a setting like Cyradon and the resulting game should be released as it's own title. You can add the "powered by the Rolemaster engine" blurb if you want. As was the original plan years and years ago. Revise the rules, release them as part of a creative work (a copyrightable asset) and develop support products. Rebuild the RM brand not by waiving the RM flag, but by using it as part of new and interesting creative game worlds.
Rolemaster as a game engine, not a game in its own right.
I totally agree with you but I think we could be a very small minority.
Add me to that minority then. I think it's a great idea. The problem, even today, is that the RM name carries the infamy of its past. People who never bothered to learn the system only saw Companion book after Companion book and thought "Oh God, look at all those core books and rule books."
However, my vote is for Kulthea and Shadow World (* Powered by the Rolemaster Remastered gaming engine (tm) )
Just my 2c.
-
Add me to that minority then. I think it's a great idea. The problem, even today, is that the RM name carries the infamy of its past. People who never bothered to learn the system only saw Companion book after Companion book and thought "Oh God, look at all those core books and rule books."
Rolemaster has relatively few books compared to most systems. I've run into more of an attitude that there is not enough support material for RMU (just core books and that's it?) than the idea that there was too much support material to go through.
-
I guess i am one of the ?majority? that likes RM generic, because i want to be able to mix fantasy with sci fi campaigns, as for example when my Spacemaster group goes to low tech worlds. I also want backwards compatibility, and have no interest in a setting like Cyradon.
One exception might be the Darkspace universe, but i will admit that setting RMU in Darkspace would be insane.
-
Add me to that minority then. I think it's a great idea. The problem, even today, is that the RM name carries the infamy of its past. People who never bothered to learn the system only saw Companion book after Companion book and thought "Oh God, look at all those core books and rule books."
Rolemaster has relatively few books compared to most systems. I've run into more of an attitude that there is not enough support material for RMU (just core books and that's it?) than the idea that there was too much support material to go through.
Unfortunately it is not the reality that is the problem. It is the fact that people still associate Rolemaster with bloat. The fact that all of RM2 in totality is a positive minnow compared to Pathfinder will never stop a miserable git complaining.
There is a terrible conundrum in that the established community won't buy in because there are only 4 core books and the public at large are unlikely to buy in if you have to buy 4 core books.
-
Add me to that minority then. I think it's a great idea. The problem, even today, is that the RM name carries the infamy of its past. People who never bothered to learn the system only saw Companion book after Companion book and thought "Oh God, look at all those core books and rule books."
Rolemaster has relatively few books compared to most systems. I've run into more of an attitude that there is not enough support material for RMU (just core books and that's it?) than the idea that there was too much support material to go through.
Too True... Pathfinder *cough* *ahem*...
As for a perceived lack of support material for RMU, that really isn't that surprising as there seems to be a major elephant in the room i.e. the definitive publishing of the core rules. I can't imagine anyone putting the work in to produce specific supplements/adventures when the project has yet to be completed.. at least to the publishers satisfaction... and appears still to be throwing up the occasional spanner in play-testing.
I've been working on something that straddles the various incarnations of RM... which makes it useable by people that would prefer sticking to RM2, RMSS.. RMU or even (shhhh..) Merp.
-
I guess i am one of the ?majority? that likes RM generic, because i want to be able to mix fantasy with sci fi campaigns, as for example when my Spacemaster group goes to low tech worlds. I also want backwards compatibility, and have no interest in a setting like Cyradon.
One exception might be the Darkspace universe, but i will admit that setting RMU in Darkspace would be insane.
Nothing has ever stopped me using a game designed for one setting for a home brew game, anything can be made more generic. In fact as I have never like LotR one of the first things I did when I discovered MERP and RM was remove the Lots elements from it to use in my own D&D world.
I would not recognise Cyradon if I landed there even by mistake so I cannot comment on it. The point is though that 'generic' never got a potential customer excited.
-
The point is though that 'generic' never got a potential customer excited.
Possibly, but DnD and Pathfinder do ok. GURPs did too back in the day.
-
There is a terrible conundrum in that the established community won't buy in because there are only 4 core books and the public at large are unlikely to buy in if you have to buy 4 core books.
I can attest to this. I wanted to get my players going in GURPS Supers. I am *supposed* to have four 'core books' total to play just the Supers aspect of the game.
Basic Set: Character
Basic Set: Campaigns
Supers
Powers
I have 3 of 4 books because I was already at $100 without shipping. Having read through the books, I could have skipped the Powers book to save some cash.
This is the reality the publisher is facing though. Books are roughly $35 USD. At three core books, the player is looking at $100+. At four core books I'm seriously considering if this trip is really necessary. It's certainly not going to leave me much extra to by supplemental material.
-
Existing players aren't afraid of it, that actually know what RM is really like. It's those who never bothered to learn it, that think it's overly complex, that are afraid and I think it's that history that needs to be overcome. That would require RMU at least has the appearance of being simplified. Regardless of if the people playing it now think it has been I don't think it remotely gives the appearance of that.
-
Three or four books as a core seems pretty normal to me. E.g. Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, Monster Manual. You could drop the monster manual if you plan to have stats for the creatures in modules and campaign books, but then you have modules and campaign books. I also have Mage The Awakening on my shelf, but it relies on the separate World of Darkness rulebook, and neither of them have any meaningful amount of information about creatures etc. And I have GURPS, I'm not going to count but it takes up more than 2' of shelf space....
No, I think what people object to most in RM is that you need to look things up on a table any time you make an attack (potentially twice), cast a spell (potentially twice), make a moving maneuver, or try to resist an effect. In 1st edition D&D, you also needed to look at a table to make an attack (once) or resist an effect, but already by 2nd edition you didn't need a table for attacks, and at some point (also 2nd edition?) you didn't need them for saves either. RMU does basically remove the need for tables for casting spells, making maneuvers, or resisting effects (there are tables that give examples for partial and absolute successes but they are really optional) but at the end of the day there's still going to be pages of charts for attacks. We've decided that's worthwhile for the detail they bring, but it's always going to be a hard sell to someone coming from a system where that was not required.
-
RM definitely sits at the simulationist end of the spectrum but how popular is the genre in today's market? The only other popular simulationist game that springs to mind is Shadowrun, while I can think of quite a few popular games with a lighter ruleset.
James
-
Three or four books as a core seems pretty normal to me. E.g. Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, Monster Manual.
Except that every version of D&D is released as a starter set with all the updated material needed to play a core set of races/classes and a module. Ie. A paired down version attached to a setting.
-
The Starter Sets are not rulebooks, they don't even have rules for making characters, just character presets. It's an adventure, some pregenerated characters, and just enough rules to run them. It doesn't remove the need to buy the rulebooks if you decide you actually want to play the game. There's definitely room to create some kind of intro product, whether it's like that, or RMX, or whatever. That's something you do after your rules are finalized though.
But I think the Starter Sets are basically irrelevant when it comes to figuring out how many books you need.
-
I do think a starter set for RM is a really good idea (not sure who first suggested it, but it wasn't me-- maybe Peter?).
-
Rolemaster shouldn't be released. The revision should be completed, then paired down and customized to a setting like Cyradon and the resulting game should be released as it's own title. You can add the "powered by the Rolemaster engine" blurb if you want. As was the original plan years and years ago. Revise the rules, release them as part of a creative work (a copyrightable asset) and develop support products. Rebuild the RM brand not by waiving the RM flag, but by using it as part of new and interesting creative game worlds.
Rolemaster as a game engine, not a game in its own right.
I totally agree with you but I think we could be a very small minority.
Add me to that minority!
Nightblade ->--
-
I do think a starter set for RM is a really good idea (not sure who first suggested it, but it wasn't me-- maybe Peter?).
Run Out The Guns! is probably a good example of this for RM.
-
Three or four books as a core seems pretty normal to me. E.g. Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, Monster Manual. You could drop the monster manual if you plan to have stats for the creatures in modules and campaign books, but then you have modules and campaign books.
Comparing RM to D&D is like me saying I have a bicep, Roger Federer has a bicep, therefore I can beat him at tennis.
The PHB/DMG/MM trio is a long established formula for the most successful rpg of all time. They have an existing user base of millions.
You also said the starter sets do not have character creation rules. That is not true. I have the starter set for 5e and it had a limited number of classes and limited options for those classes but the first thing they take you through is the char gen process.
-
I do think a starter set for RM is a really good idea (not sure who first suggested it, but it wasn't me-- maybe Peter?).
I think that was my fault. But, several years ago I said there should be a 'lite' version of RM. The industry has moved on from those now. What RM needs is a Quickstart guide, no char gen, pre-gen characters, basic mechanics and a starting adventure, all in about 50 pages that looks gorgeous to flip though and makes you want/need/desire to own the full game.
That is what today's players expect to see from a game that wants their money, time and effort to learn. That is RPG try before you buy. Not big or clever but very basic marketing to new customers that works if the product is a good one. Always has, always will.
-
To be honest I am a huge RMX guy and have been pumping it on these boards for years and years because of what you just said Peter. It's the only version of RM I ever brought to a game table and people were willing to pick up and thumb through. That alone shows some value.
To be clear though, I don't want to compare D&D to RM. I want RM to succeed and am looking at other successful formulas. Having an free/inexpensive "try me" game is the most common way to attract new business. The starter box set is a D&D tradition. ICE needs a ready to run adventure with 4 pre-gen characters as a free download. The rules contained walk you through that adventure. But, before that product is launched, there needs to be system/setting book ready for the same setting. This book would expand the rules by adding CharGen/Advancement, maybe a couple more professions etc but it would still not be the full RM rule set. It would be the RM rule-set customized to that setting and named to not be dismissed immediately by long-time RPGers who made up their minds about RM in 1991.
-
Rolemaster shouldn't be released. The revision should be completed, then paired down and customized to a setting like Cyradon and the resulting game should be released as it's own title. You can add the "powered by the Rolemaster engine" blurb if you want. As was the original plan years and years ago. Revise the rules, release them as part of a creative work (a copyrightable asset) and develop support products. Rebuild the RM brand not by waiving the RM flag, but by using it as part of new and interesting creative game worlds.
Rolemaster as a game engine, not a game in its own right.
I totally agree with you but I think we could be a very small minority.
Add me to that minority!
Nightblade ->--
I suppose I fall into this grouping as well based on my constant harping that the RM engine should be designed with genres other than fantasy in mind (or at least the ability to easily shift the core to a different genre). I've converted the RM core to a number of different settings, and it's perhaps uniquely suited for this.
-
I have as well. I think that is one of the exercises that gave me a new perspective on what makes the "game engine".
-
I think RMX was a step in the right direction. However, to attract new players, I think the free/cheap starter pack (pre-gen PC's; starting scenario; basic ruleset) is a must. I would lean toward the free myself; as more people are likely to at least download the package and check it out.
I recently got my hands on the latest version of Vampire: The Requium (5th edition) Starter Pack. That's exactly what it is. Some pre-gen PC's; an interesting setting with a starting scenario that would be easy to expand upon into a full campaign (either via official modules a GM could purchase or for the GM to develop themselves) & a quick guide to the basics of the ruleset so that you can get a group up & running with little effort. I've played V:tR in the past & was curious about the new edition. But I think the adventure scenario is what grabbed my attention the most.
RPG's are often compared to living novels. A good novel is all about story. What is the story RM is trying to tell? I'm not sure, there's been so many over the years (Middle Earth; Shadow World; Cyradon; SM Imperium; SM Privateers; Cyberspace; Robin Hood; Mythic Egypt; Ancient Greece; Vikings; Arabian Nights; Ancient Rome; Dark Space; Time Raiders; 17th Century France; 17th Century Pirates; Shades Of Darkness & Time Raiders - never mind all the homebrew worlds all the other GMs have been using since the 80's!). Again, one could compare to D&D (Dragonlance; Forgotten Realms; Ravenloft; Dark Sun; etc…), but I really think we have to stop doing that. Do we really want to simply follow D&D's lead, or do we want to follow our own unique path?
That was the successful formula for RM in the early days. It was an unique alternative to the game that started it all & it won a lot of fans because of its uniqueness. In fact, many of us are still here touting the merits of RM a few decades later. So maybe its time to be innovative again. It definately wouldn't hurt.
Just my thoughts, take 'em for what they're worth & keep rolling 66's :)
Nightblade ->--
-
p.s. As for a setting I think Shadow World should be the default. Either that, ro some new setting that has no previous association with RM.
Nightblade ->--
-
I agree in many ways. I think though that (at least from a business perspective) the focus of ICE should be getting RM into as many hands as possible. I would use and existing SW book that already has a set of maps and some good, full colour artwork, and extract/expand one of the adventures (Xa'ar/Green Gryphon come to mind). It doesn't have to be an epic. It has to let a group of players use the core dice rolls and run through a couple of combats. I would however focus on a few of the things that make RM different than other games in the walkthrough to demonstrate it's uniqueness.
-
Agreed, and stat out a group of RM-iconic PCs like the ones on the front of old RM book covers and show level progression @1st, 5th and 20th lvl.
3/3.5 and Paizo’s 3.75 did that and drew the eye to their books as those same characters show up on each cover time and again.
It got me to buy/collect some of ‘em. Great non-linguistic marketing!
-
I suspect that there are people who adventure in Shadow World but do not play RM.
It would be worth considering drip feeding key SW NPC stats, created for RMU and sending it/them as complimentary PDFs to everyone on the OBS mailing list that has ever bought a SW book.
That may just make people curious about this new edition. That would also reach people who are not registered on these forums.
I agree that SW is a great setting for RMU but I do much prefer something much more iconic that will grab the eye and the imagination.
If it were my responsibility to launch such a thing then I would create a QS based upon Boudicca and the Iceni. No need for magic, no need for monsters. What you do get would be a chopped down Arms and Character Law, Celtic warriors and centurion. For those that buy into the idea you can go for an expanded RMU powered game with a limited spell law for the Druids and Roman Seers. You could expand the basic bestiary with more native Britton animals and Roman imports like war elephants and lions.
That concept is easy to manage just with content from C&AL which is also the most mature of all the book in terms of testing.
If the powers that be like that idea they can have it for free.
-
I think RMX was a step in the right direction. However, to attract new players, I think the free/cheap starter pack (pre-gen PC's; starting scenario; basic ruleset) is a must. I would lean toward the free myself; as more people are likely to at least download the package and check it out.
I recently got my hands on the latest version of Vampire: The Requium (5th edition) Starter Pack. That's exactly what it is. Some pre-gen PC's; an interesting setting with a starting scenario that would be easy to expand upon into a full campaign (either via official modules a GM could purchase or for the GM to develop themselves) & a quick guide to the basics of the ruleset so that you can get a group up & running with little effort. I've played V:tR in the past & was curious about the new edition. But I think the adventure scenario is what grabbed my attention the most.
RPG's are often compared to living novels. A good novel is all about story. What is the story RM is trying to tell? I'm not sure, there's been so many over the years (Middle Earth; Shadow World; Cyradon; SM Imperium; SM Privateers; Cyberspace; Robin Hood; Mythic Egypt; Ancient Greece; Vikings; Arabian Nights; Ancient Rome; Dark Space; Time Raiders; 17th Century France; 17th Century Pirates; Shades Of Darkness & Time Raiders - never mind all the homebrew worlds all the other GMs have been using since the 80's!). Again, one could compare to D&D (Dragonlance; Forgotten Realms; Ravenloft; Dark Sun; etc…), but I really think we have to stop doing that. Do we really want to simply follow D&D's lead, or do we want to follow our own unique path?
That was the successful formula for RM in the early days. It was an unique alternative to the game that started it all & it won a lot of fans because of its uniqueness. In fact, many of us are still here touting the merits of RM a few decades later. So maybe its time to be innovative again. It definately wouldn't hurt.
Just my thoughts, take 'em for what they're worth & keep rolling 66's :)
Nightblade ->--
Keep in mind, though, that most of the source books were dual-stated for another system (Hero if I remember right), and I think many of them were originally done for that system and RM was added as an afterthought. And the majority of them also were just tossed out there with no real support or follow-through.
Frankly, the RM engine is just too robust and flexible to be tied to one genre. You've got authors willing and able to work in those other genres, and many of said genres are in dire need of a solid, more simulationist engine. But it also needs to be the engine, with adjustments made for specific genres. That might mean licensing, but I think that will be the best way to get the engine out to a wider audience.
-
I don't know the legal hurdles it would require, but almost starting over, doing what the original RM materials did (stand-alone add-ons like Spell Law) and providing instructions on how to weave it into D&D. There's your road to relevance again (looking at the bigger picture).
-
I don't know the legal hurdles it would require, but almost starting over, doing what the original RM materials did (stand-alone add-ons like Spell Law) and providing instructions on how to weave it into D&D. There's your road to relevance again (looking at the bigger picture).
The difficulty is that back in the 80s RM was new, radical and exciting. Now it is run of the mill. Criticals systems like RM's are common, skills are so common they are core to D&D. The modular flexibility of RM is positively dwarfed by what is available from DMGuild.
I don't develop for DnD because it is virtually impossible to get noticed amongst all the noise. There were 65 new releases this week alone from a mountain of free and pay what you want to official supplements for Eberron and multi-hundred page unofficial supplements such as a herbalism and alchemy supplement I noticed this week for $10.
What I am suggesting is that the market is very different today than it was 40+ years ago.
-
I don't know, Spell Law was the first thing we integrated into D&D due to it's detail and diversity.
Still, the overall point is a large portion of the RPG customer base stems from D&D. Get that crowd interested, like old RM did, and I think the chances of success are infinitely improved.
-
I don't know, Spell Law was the first thing we integrated into D&D due to it's detail and diversity.
Still, the overall point is a large portion of the RPG customer base stems from D&D. Get that crowd interested, like old RM did, and I think the chances of success are infinitely improved.
Perhaps, but there's another market lurking out there: FPS types and those graduating from Rockstar's sandbox games. With minimal investment the RM engine can appeal to them, and possibly lure them into tabletop gaming.
I get that most people here are wedded to fantasy gaming to the possible exclusion of all else, but it's not the only market in town. If RM wants to stand out as an engine, it has to stand on its flexibility. And the ability to move from fantasy to modern to scifi and who knows what else is something it and GURPS share. Why not accentuate that instead of a modular system that Peter points out isn't really unique anymore?
-
Agreed, and stat out a group of RM-iconic PCs like the ones on the front of old RM book covers and show level progression @1st, 5th and 20th lvl.
3/3.5 and Paizo’s 3.75 did that and drew the eye to their books as those same characters show up on each cover time and again.
It got me to buy/collect some of ‘em. Great non-linguistic marketing!
Love that idea!
Nightblade ->--
-
I don't know, Spell Law was the first thing we integrated into D&D due to it's detail and diversity.
Still, the overall point is a large portion of the RPG customer base stems from D&D. Get that crowd interested, like old RM did, and I think the chances of success are infinitely improved.
Perhaps, but there's another market lurking out there: FPS types and those graduating from Rockstar's sandbox games. With minimal investment the RM engine can appeal to them, and possibly lure them into tabletop gaming.
I get that most people here are wedded to fantasy gaming to the possible exclusion of all else, but it's not the only market in town. If RM wants to stand out as an engine, it has to stand on its flexibility. And the ability to move from fantasy to modern to scifi and who knows what else is something it and GURPS share. Why not accentuate that instead of a modular system that Peter points out isn't really unique anymore?
You're right about that. As for Rockstar & Sandbox stuff; my kid & all his friends seem to live & breathe Fortnite (I personally don't see the appeal - tho I spent many hours playing Wolfenstein 3D & Doom back in the day). They're in Grade 6 (11 years old) & they approach it like me & my friends approached/talked about RPGs (specifically RM) back in high school 25+ years ago. The big video games all seem to be pseudo-modern shoot-em-outs with settings that draw upon post-apocalypse-like situations. Perhaps we need to look at this sort of setting (Cyberspace's Death Valley Free Prison & RMSS's Shades Of Darkness might be starting points for such a setting.
Nightblade ->--
-
Perhaps, but there's another market lurking out there: FPS types and those graduating from Rockstar's sandbox games. With minimal investment the RM engine can appeal to them, and possibly lure them into tabletop gaming.
I'm skeptical anyone will make much headway with that crowd without a well known licensed tie in like RM gained with LOTR or others did with Star Wars.
-
Although I agree with the idea of a license I think the real underlying issue is that ICE does not have an IP of their own. The new version of RM has been a long time in the works and the material is a bunch of math and tables. You can't own that. ICE needs products that they have exclusivity to. Those years of math and table development need to be woven into a creative property like SW or Cyradon and introduced to the gaming market- even if it's for a short time while a newer property is being developed.
-
Perhaps, but there's another market lurking out there: FPS types and those graduating from Rockstar's sandbox games. With minimal investment the RM engine can appeal to them, and possibly lure them into tabletop gaming.
I'm skeptical anyone will make much headway with that crowd without a well known licensed tie in like RM gained with LOTR or others did with Star Wars.
I honestly do not think that ICE have the financial resources to pull off a tie in like that.
From a marketing point of view ICE have three assets.
The first is something called publisher points or PPP. These are awarded by OneBookShelf on a basis of 10 + 1 per $10 worth of goods sold each month. So ICE have sold something like $70,000 worth of products and taking time into account should have somewhere in the region of 7000-8000 PPP. They can spend PPP to make any eventual product 'Deal of the day' on the PBS network of sites at a cost of about 450PPP per day. So they could feature for about 15 days. I would scatter that so the feature does not just become invisible wallpaper. That should drive some sales and that should generate some more PPP which can buy more on site advertising. PPP are free and ICE should be sat on a significant pile of them.
The second asset is their own brand name. You could trot Nicholas and to some extent Kevin out to give blog interviews and talk about RMU and Shadow World. You should not under estimate this. You should not under estimate the time it takes to build the goodwill of the bloggers or the influence they can exert. As an example of this, ICE has a long established game and a devoted community. Because ICE have only publicised the Beta 2 downloads to this community (despite it being a public playtest) the PDFs have been downloaded 138 times since June 11, 2015, nearly three and a half years. I am a single individual with a blog but I interact with other bloggers where I frequently comment on and engage with their content. The biggest names I work with are probably stargazer's world and take on rules. I also engage with the FAR system. Most of those you will have never heard of, which is sort of the point, I am a minnow in a small pool, no brand, no community. My own public playtest has been downloaded 195 times in four weeks. It is going to take time and effort to build public awareness again but if you want to appear like a giant of the games industry you need to make some noise. Trying to do that AFTER the product launch is a really bad idea as these things take time to build up and before you know it your game is no longer 'new' and other more publicity savvy publishers have stolen your moment with their own releases.
Finally, ICE have a very small war chest of cash reserves. If you want to pay for advertising on gaming sites or even get professionally written press releases to circulate then these all cost money. I normally allow 16 to 20 weeks lead time between engaging a PR agency and when I want the marketing to hit the presses or peoples screens.
Regarding licenses there is often more than one way to skin a cat.
If we take Tales from the Loop as an example or case study. It is widely regarded as as close to a Stranger Things rpg as you can get without having the TV programme title on the book. Stranger things first aired in July 2016, the full Tale from the Loop Rules were released in June 2017, just 11 months afterwards but also when ST was still at the peak of its popularity.
If one looks at RMU as a lot of lego brick sized blocks, each skill is a block, each weapon is a block, or profession is a block; one can have a whole box of blocks that can be used to build any system extremely quickly and all that is then needed is the prose to create the setting and style. The sort of thing I mean is... Netflix has bought the rights to a BBC series called The Bodyguard (nothing to do with Kevin Costner!). That is due to become a Netflix Original. So by using the mix and match/lego brick approach one could put together an RPG where the PCs form part of a close protection unit against a world of politics and international intrigue. One could pillage/paraphrase the background material from wikipedia and imdb for the setting. The IMDB episode guide basically gives you an entire 6 step adventure you can use for 'inspiration' to build an adventure that would form the second half of the core rulebook. One could get "Specialist Protection - A contemporary RPG thriller against a backdrop of the Special Protection Branch of London's Metropolitan Police (powered by the Rolemaster Engine)." There is absolutely no reason not to get that together and and ready for launch in time to run alongside the Netflix release. In fact I think I could copy and paste most of it from HARP FS (I lost my SM books a few years ago in a house move) and create that game in a weekend. I would not need any of the Sci Fi professions, no sci fi skills, no spaceships or high tech gear, no psions, no alien races, no races at all as you can just build Human into everything. Strip back the combat to martial arts and guns. Copy and paste as much content as I can from wikipedia and IMDB and then put it all in my own words. The closest game to what I am describing here, currently on sale, is a supplement for Twilight2000 released in 2004. Basically you would get a Netflix tie in for free with a completely open and empty market place. Create the game and then get out there and tell everyone that "Specialist Protection is the game for everyone who loves The Bodyguard and wants to explore a world of Royalty and Specialist Protection." It will be the interviews and social media shares and quotes that create the web of bonds between the game and TV show. At no point do you say "this is the official game of..." but you can list the TV series as inspiration along with other series in the genre.
This is basically a rinse and repeat idea, as intothatdarkness says...
With minimal investment the RM engine can appeal to them, and possibly lure them into tabletop gaming.
A 'Generic' RPG ruleset has to be able to cope with everything and anything. A very specific RPG ruleset only has to deal with a very specific set of situations. It can therefore for smaller, only the skills and weapons that you will actually need, if you need magic then only the magic required for that specific cultural heritage. Everything that is not relevent can be discarded and when you do that then most of the hangover criticisms of RM, too big, too many options, too many charts and so on all disappear.
-
>There is absolutely no reason not to get that together and and ready for launch in time to run alongside the Netflix release.
Except that someone has to write it. Being a shop of freelancers, I don't know that Nicholas can just task someone with writing a book on topic X. Someone has to want to do it.
That's not to say it can't happen or even that it's a bad idea, but I think it would have to happen as a result of someone being excited about that setting and personally enthusiastic about writing it, then pitching it to ICE.
-
>There is absolutely no reason not to get that together and and ready for launch in time to run alongside the Netflix release.
Except that someone has to write it. Being a shop of freelancers, I don't know that Nicholas can just task someone with writing a book on topic X. Someone has to want to do it.
That's not to say it can't happen or even that it's a bad idea, but I think it would have to happen as a result of someone being excited about that setting and personally enthusiastic about writing it, then pitching it to ICE.
And therein lies the problem. If I had so much as seen the programme and liked it I could write and release such a game in a matter of days and I wouldn't need ICE. What I was trying to illustrate is that to go from the Bland/Uninspiring/Generic RMU 'as written' to the Bang on trend/Evocative/Exciting game with its real world backdrop is the work of a weekend or maybe a week of evenings. In the process you end up with a much lighter ruleset as you only need what is required for that setting and most of the old criticisms do not apply.
Other things that happen if you think along these lines.
- Games set in this world ONLY need A&CL.
- ICE could release multiple games in rapid succession as single volume standalone games.
- Each game can target a different interest group broadening the appeal of a traditionally fantasy only system to a much wider audience(s)
- The most popular of these targeted games can be supported with adventures or supplements if the numbers suggest it is worthwhile.
- These should be treated right from the start as 'fire and forget' or 'one egg per basket' games.
For ICE getting A&CL fixed and ready immediately gives them fast to market revenue streams and a supply of regular material suitable for press releases. Get the ICE brand out into the world as a company producing games.
-
Going more modular would also allow quicker releases of material. I've got three genre settings and rules more or less dying right now because nothing can be done until RMU is finalized in terms of core engine stuff. I'm sure others are facing the same issue. There ARE interested freelancers out there with material, but nothing can really happen until the final RMU (or whatever it ends up being called) comes out. As Peter points out, having just A&CL finalized would be a huge help for those of us working outside fantasy.
-
I'm not necessarily agreeing with the idea of setting-dependent publications, but if you were going to do that, I wonder if some of those old ICE setting books could be repurposed for RMU: e.g. Vikings, Mythic Greece, etc.
-
I am thinking one could run a bit of a fun competition. A month long RMU hack month where anyone could repurpose A&CL to produce a game, setting and customisation. The 'best' three, as judged by Nicholas, get published as standalone games.
It would not be that different to NagaDemon which is running right now. I am taking part in a NagaDemon event where we have 1 month, November, to create a custom FUDGE game.
-
I'm not necessarily agreeing with the idea of setting-dependent publications, but if you were going to do that, I wonder if some of those old ICE setting books could be repurposed for RMU: e.g. Vikings, Mythic Greece, etc.
What I'm working on is more genre-specific than setting, and that's driven mainly by different Profession needs and conventions. But some of those old books are certainly good candidates. I'd say the Vikings one in particular, as it was less Hero-centric (in terms of the game system). The Pirates one was already somewhat skewed in that I think it was originally done for Heroes and then 'grafted' into RM. The Old West one was decent, but needs an entire redo of the firearm attack tables and crits (what I'm already doing for my genre stuff). The Egypt one was good as well, though I can't speak to specifics because I don't have that one any more.
-
The Mythic Greece one was also pretty cool, in that it allowed the players to have very high stats (as befits demigods), and high-stat abilities. I always thought that was kind of fun.
-
Funny Peter. I was thinking the same thing; though I was still rolling a fantasy genre around at the time.
My thought was there is surely enough of RMU completed that any of the folk here could put together a half dozen level 1 characters and develop a story to put them through their paces. As for the creatures, spells etc....only use what is complete. And if there is a divergence from the future core material - will it really matter than much?
Maybe the developers should create a level 1 character each - and that would be the pool of pregens available?
-
I'm loving this discussion! :)
There are enough of us out there who want ICE to succeed & to see RMU succeed that I think we're all willing to pitch in our talents to help out. Peter's idea of one-off settings (with possible further modular support given sales) is a great one. Using RMU as the foundation ties everything together. The one thing I would caution is that this sort of scenario might spread resources even thinner. If in a best case scenario, more of these "alternate lines" take off then what ICE & the community (i.e us, the freelancers producing the material) can support, then that is going to lead to other problems that may hurt ICE in the long run. Just a devil's advocacy warning of caution, I guess. But I do think it's a wonderful idea.
As such, I have a pseudo-Pulp world based on the real world of the 1930's & 40's that I was writing a story for. The background story mechanics are all derived from RM2 (with some help from RMSS's Pulp Adventures), but could be converted to RMU. I would love to develop that setting a bit more (which means I'd have to cool off my Nytheun Creative juices - which are flowing nicely at the moment ;D ) & would be willing to contribute it to this sort of project. It might flow well with intothedarkness' modern firearms ruleset he has modified from various past ICE publications - I've been using RMSS's Weapon Law: Firearms modified for the RM2 ruleset.
Again, I'd be willing to help out with such an endeavour if ICE was interested.
Nightblade ->--
-
In the new year I would probably have time to contribute to such an idea. In the mean time I am happy to throw some ideas out there where I feel A&CL has most of what we need.
First Up!
RM criticals in a kung fu setting has Kill Bill written all over it.
-
Second,
First War of Scottish Independence against King Edward I of England.
"We all end up dead, it's just a question of how and why." quoted from William Wallace and most experienced RM players
-
Another brainstorm setting idea:
A Space Opera (à la Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, etc…).
You could borrow Starship rules from SM or HARP SF - or even just steal the Silent Death ruleset for simplicity's sake.
Nightblade ->--
-
Another obvious one:
Resurrect & update Cyberspace.
Nightblade ->--
-
Pulp era survival after a plane crash in northern Ontario.
-
Pulp era survival after a plane crash in northern Ontario.
You could make it like a post-nuclear holocaust survival game just by setting it in Sudbury.
-
I'm Spartacus!
-
Ok, so how about this: all of us potential Spartaci can make our ideal introductory adventure, as a kind of starter-pack to show how awesome each of our own ideas are, as well as to help new players and showcase the flexibility of RMU? You could adapt RMU's rules to your setting however you please. Aim for just a simple, one-session adventure. Ideally, you would also include pregenerated characters, so players can jump right into RMU and start playing.
ICE might even pick some of them to feature on its website or newsletter -- a kind of 'starter pack of the month' -- for new players.
I personally have long intended to clean up my hastily written introductory adventure (set in the Zor wastes of Kulthea) for this purpose too, so this will give me a chance to do that.
-
I really think we would need some sort of official sanction before we started modding ICE's flagship product before it is even released.
Do you realise that if Creature Law was finished we would have all the rules we need to make a Kung Fu Panda game that would give kids nightmares when Po's neck gets broken in his first fight.
-
Well, I guess we need to talk to the powers that be at ICE & get their take on the idea. I am certain they would need to give us guidelines we would have to follow & some legalese about product identity & copyrights.
Maybe to help with the editing & post-production stage (if we ever get that far), we could all help out in that vein as well - as I am certain Nicholas has enough on his plate with the official product pipeline. Edit each other's manuscripts as a sort of community led project.
Thoughts?
Nightblade ->--
-
Instead of the official ICE newsletter (or in addition to) - what about The Guild Companion? They used to have The Guild Adventurer. Maybe our "Start-ups" can land in a new edition of the Guild Adventurer.
Nightblade ->--
-
Do you realise that if Creature Law was finished we would have all the rules we need to make a Kung Fu Panda game that would give kids nightmares when Po's neck gets broken in his first fight.
Lol! Almost made me spit out my soup.
'Suck it up, kid. And watch out for any unseen imaginary turtles.'
-
Pulp era survival after a plane crash in northern Ontario.
You could make it like a post-nuclear holocaust survival game just by setting it in Sudbury.
Sudbury would be a good spot. Lots of resources: mines; forest; lakes & rivers… Much better survival spot than the GTA.
Nightblade ->--
-
Sorry should explain for the non-Canuks :-[
GTA = Greater Toronto Area.
Nightblade ->--
-
Sorry should explain for the non-Canuks :-[
GTA = Greater Toronto Area.
Nightblade ->--
I could not work out how Grand Theft Auto fitted into that...
-
Instead of the official ICE newsletter (or in addition to) - what about The Guild Companion? They used to have The Guild Adventurer. Maybe our "Start-ups" can land in a new edition of the Guild Adventurer.
Nightblade ->--
I think everyone should write and submit fully statted adventures for Guild Adventurer. I believe that the only sticking point for publishing new editions of the TGA is the fact that there is no advantage to ICE in publishing more material for RMFRP and RMC just before those games are discontinued. You want more new material for the new system not more new material for the old systems.
In addition if any of these got published then putting them into TGA would consign them to obscurity. The point is to have standalone games that showcase how great the core RMU system is and reach across genres where there are no traditional RM players or GMs. Releasing them into a fairly obscure RM specific periodical really defeats the object.
As for the guild companion the same basic truth holds true, we are about the only people who read it and if we are the people writing it we have extended the reach of RMU not one whit.
-
Ok, so how about this: all of us potential Spartaci can make our ideal introductory adventure, as a kind of starter-pack to show how awesome each of our own ideas are, as well as to help new players and showcase the flexibility of RMU? You could adapt RMU's rules to your setting however you please. Aim for just a simple, one-session adventure. Ideally, you would also include pregenerated characters, so players can jump right into RMU and start playing.
ICE might even pick some of them to feature on its website or newsletter -- a kind of 'starter pack of the month' -- for new players.
I personally have long intended to clean up my hastily written introductory adventure (set in the Zor wastes of Kulthea) for this purpose too, so this will give me a chance to do that.
My plate is pretty full until Jan 2019. I have a new FUDGE game to write this month and I kind of promised to create an Android App in December and I haven't written any Java code is years. The App should be fairly simple but it will still take time. I also have the December fanzine to write and I have plans for a Christmas Holiday Adventure Special edition as well. (can anyone think of a good 'O' word to put into that title? I am thinking Christmas Holiday Adventure Ogre Special but only because ogres are scarier than otters.
-
More seriously, if we do this then we should steer clear of guns as RMU doesn't have gun rules yet. I know that Intothatdarkness has fully developed firearms tables but I do not think that ICE has licensed them and creating an RMU powered game that is not compatible with RMU is surely counter productive.
-
I was thinking of making it a holiday project myself as well. I think the ideal deadline would be the publication of RMU, so we've got a little while at least.
I kind of see it too as a thank-you to the development team for all their hard work.
-
Fair point re: gun rules, Peter. Some of the other ideas might fair better (& here I just was re-reading the manuscript to that Pseudo-Pulp story I started a while back).
I guess that means Cyberspace & Space Operas are out until those kinds of weapons rules are developed (probably with SMU - if & when that happens).
Back to ancient greece & egypt then (& similar settings), I guess :)
Nightblade ->--
-
On the plus side (for me at least), I can go back to Nytheun. Perhaps my Beisash Way Station might fit the bill for a Starter Pack. We're still talking D&D/LotResque fantasy, tho. But it's something.
Nightblade ->--
-
I think bows/crossbows can easily be used as the guidelines for firearms. RMX used a Rapid Load & Fire Penalty. This could just be renames Recoil and serve as a penalty for firing in rapid succession. Reload times could be based on a Sling for something like a bolt action rifle. I think one of the tricks about firearms is to not write a whole set of rules exclusive to them.
-
A lot of the complexity of firearms comes from high rates of fire relative to the duration of the combat round. If you pick a setting that limits them to black powder, those issues go away and you really just need an attack table (possibly only one plus size modifiers and range modifiers), maybe also a critical chart.
-
A lot of the complexity of firearms comes from high rates of fire relative to the duration of the combat round. If you pick a setting that limits them to black powder, those issues go away and you really just need an attack table (possibly only one plus size modifiers and range modifiers), maybe also a critical chart.
I've got both. And no, bows and crossbows don't work for firearms. My stuff for firearms is composed of attack tables, a set of modifiers for to-hit based on recoil and range, and that's pretty much it. Frankly, RM got firearms wrong most of the time when they tried to do them....in part because the old round was simply too long and also in part because too many of the sourcebooks treated them like crossbows or bows. Once you crack the code regarding maximum damage based on caliber and bullet weight, the rest is fairly easy and quick to resolve.
-
It is funny how people instinctively go for bows and crossbows.
If I had no table to hand I used the sling table. They at least fired bullets!
-
Pulp era survival after a plane crash in northern Ontario.
You could make it like a post-nuclear holocaust survival game just by setting it in Sudbury.
You can do either of these, just don't have guns on the plane or available.
-
Fair point re: gun rules, Peter. Some of the other ideas might fair better (& here I just was re-reading the manuscript to that Pseudo-Pulp story I started a while back).
I guess that means Cyberspace & Space Operas are out until those kinds of weapons rules are developed (probably with SMU - if & when that happens).
Back to ancient greece & egypt then (& similar settings), I guess :)
Nightblade ->--
Do not let the lack of guns limit your imagination.
I am from the UK so my world view is somewhat skewed but...
- The Iceni/Roman/Boudica period could be a great setting check out https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5932548/?ref_=nv_sr_1 and the episode guide for plot ideas. No one can copyright "Britannia" as a name.
- William Wallace, think Braveheart
- The Dane Law period was serialised from the Bernard Cornwall novels recently as The Last Kingdom. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4179452/?ref_=nv_sr_1 again see the episode list for plot ideas
- Stepping away from the historical we get Atlantis https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2705602/?ref_=nv_sr_3
- Tudors anyone? The war of the roses was the inspiration for Game of Thrones. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0758790/
- Shakespeare anyone? RPGs set in the backdrop of the historical plays. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2262456/episodes?season=1&ref_=ttep_ep_sn_pv
Those are ideas which are basically tie-ins to BBC tv series. There is no need use anything from the series but it is a lot faster to what an episode and take notes and be inspired than it is to wade through play after play or countless history texts looking for inspiration.
Now lets go off piste...
- There are no guns in Scooby Doo so an investigative RPG is ruled in. You could just as easily read that as Nancy Drew or the Hardy Boys. Personally I wouldn't want to play it but it would certainly reach an non-traditional Rolemaster audience!
- The Titanic. Imagine a plot where the titanic was sunk by an Anarchists bomb. You could have a gun on board but in a set play the anarchist fires the gun at the characters a couple of times to effect his or her escape and on the third shot it jams irrevocably.
- The entire Kung Fu genre is pretty much gun free.
- There are some classic films that are pretty much gun free, Blair Witch Project, the norwegian film Troll Hunter. We have trolls as a playable race in A&CL.
- A modern day RPG set about the idea of mad cultists. If you set it in the UK guns are simply not common. Also most of the people seduced into joining the cult could well be completely innocent, it is only the priesthood that are likely to be murderous psychopaths with ceremonial daggers.
- A bermuda triangle rpg. The players are on a yacht that is blown off course during a tropical storm. In the morning clear sky reveals a traditional tall ship drifting nearby. No crew seem to be onboard. Are the players back in the 1700s or is there a ship from the eighteenth century suddenly drifting off the florida keys?
That is pretty much 15 minutes worth of ideas.
If I were French/German/Scandinavian then I am guessing my inspirations would be completely different. I haven't even touched on the Crusades/Knights Templar/The inquisition/Viking sagas or alternative histories.
-
I just thought of a paranormal investigation game. You let the characters have guns but you don't need rules or attack tables as nothing is harmed by them, as in you cannot shoot a ghost or poltergeist. Firing the gun simply becomes a narrative device as the GM describes pot plants exploding or mirrors shattering. The players still make open ended attack rolls and can buy the skill but you just don't need attack tables as they do no damage.
-
(...)
- The entire Kung Fu genre is pretty much gun free.
How well a wuxia module works depends a lot on how much one can do with the martial arts rules, though it doesn't need to be that complex --just enough to tie with for the cinematic aspects. Once that is done, the rest isn't really hard, since no actual historical background is necessary, just enough to get the general fantasy feeling of wuxia. The more problematic aspect may come from the lack of weapon tables for eastern weapons though.
...that being said, I'm able to do that with RM2 so, if we're allowed to also provide custom weapon tables, I guess it's feasible in RMU.
-
I just thought of a paranormal investigation game. You let the characters have guns but you don't need rules or attack tables as nothing is harmed by them, as in you cannot shoot a ghost or poltergeist. Firing the gun simply becomes a narrative device as the GM describes pot plants exploding or mirrors shattering. The players still make open ended attack rolls and can buy the skill but you just don't need attack tables as they do no damage.
Make it a Cthulhu story. Your weapons would be pretty much useless. ;D
-
(...)
- The entire Kung Fu genre is pretty much gun free.
How well a wuxia module works depends a lot on how much one can do with the martial arts rules, though it doesn't need to be that complex --just enough to tie with for the cinematic aspects. Once that is done, the rest isn't really hard, since no actual historical background is necessary, just enough to get the general fantasy feeling of wuxia. The more problematic aspect may come from the lack of weapon tables for eastern weapons though.
I am glad you are here OLF. I put the French reference in my post above explicitly to attract your attention.
I am imagining that the attack tables in these one off games will not look like the attack tables that RM traditionalists will be used to. If I were to write up an Enter The Dragon style game there is absolutely no need for different armour types as no one has any armour, there are no size rules as everyone is human. Attack size applies because of charging and maybe small or two handed weapons. So if attack tables are just a single row then you could have a dozen on a page. Creating new rows for specific weapons is not a massive task, surely? Additionally if we get it not quite right, does it matter? *IF* the game suddenly became popular then tweaking the damage up or down a point here to there in a companion would not break the game.
-
I just thought of a paranormal investigation game. You let the characters have guns but you don't need rules or attack tables as nothing is harmed by them, as in you cannot shoot a ghost or poltergeist. Firing the gun simply becomes a narrative device as the GM describes pot plants exploding or mirrors shattering. The players still make open ended attack rolls and can buy the skill but you just don't need attack tables as they do no damage.
Make it a Cthulhu story. Your weapons would be pretty much useless. ;D
I was trying to avoid the cliché of Cthulhu and besides Darkspace kind of does that already. I am also producing lots of Cthulhu inspired adventures at the moment but yes, that is what I was getting at.
-
I just thought of a paranormal investigation game. You let the characters have guns but you don't need rules or attack tables as nothing is harmed by them, as in you cannot shoot a ghost or poltergeist. Firing the gun simply becomes a narrative device as the GM describes pot plants exploding or mirrors shattering. The players still make open ended attack rolls and can buy the skill but you just don't need attack tables as they do no damage.
Until they start shooting at each other or some human NPC that wasn't intended to be a target. That won't happen in every group, but it will happen in some groups.
-
I just thought of a paranormal investigation game. You let the characters have guns but you don't need rules or attack tables as nothing is harmed by them, as in you cannot shoot a ghost or poltergeist. Firing the gun simply becomes a narrative device as the GM describes pot plants exploding or mirrors shattering. The players still make open ended attack rolls and can buy the skill but you just don't need attack tables as they do no damage.
Until they start shooting at each other or some human NPC that wasn't intended to be a target. That won't happen in every group, but it will happen in some groups.
But you still don't need detailed combat rules for guns. If your group shoots at an innocent you kill the innocent. The GM runs the world and sets the tone of the game.
-
One thing about guns - is they necessitate healing. It's not fantasy roleplaying where healers, herbs, and potions abound.......someone shot will likely die, sooner or later, without healing. And even with healing the recovery time would not be very game friendly.
-
Speaking of the British Isles, Peter. How 'bout something with a little bit more Celtic flair - you could do dark age pre-Saxon Brittain with Druids, Bards, the Fæ (Tuatha de Danaan) & even Celtic heroes like Cú Chulainn or Fionn mac Cumhaill.
I guess my Pseudo-Pulp setting could work - though one of the main players in the story thusfar is a Weapons manufacturing company that is one of the biggest backers of the Nazi-like regime that rules the country where the story begins. It would still be nice to have some sort of firearms rules, beyond what is offered in SM; Cyberspace & Weapon Law. But those are a start, I guess.
Still, I seem to have gotten stuck in the Beisash Way Station at the moment. A nice little spot that I'm only starting to explore.
Nightblade ->--
-
One thing about guns - is they necessitate healing. It's not fantasy roleplaying where healers, herbs, and potions abound.......someone shot will likely die, sooner or later, without healing. And even with healing the recovery time would not be very game friendly.
I would certainly include healing rules as standard. The way you portray healing can set the tone of the entire game. If heroes are fully healed at the end of every scene then that invites a hack and slash approach to everything. If you heroes spend weeks and months in hospital that says something else.
If you don't want the players using guns then operate a 'Bang! You're dead!' system.
My NaGaDeMon game this year has about 25 words about guns, single shot, double tap, 3 round bursts and fully automatic fire but it has several paragraphs plus examples about healing and death. The emphasis is on not fighting, not getting hurt and not killing innocent people. In another twist the demonic creatures are immune to bullets anyway so should a player spray a room with bullets then only innocent people will get hurt.
-
Speaking of the British Isles, Peter. How 'bout something with a little bit more Celtic flair - you could do dark age pre-Saxon Brittain with Druids, Bards, the Fæ (Tuatha de Danaan) & even Celtic heroes like Cú Chulainn or Fionn mac Cumhaill.
I guess my Pseudo-Pulp setting could work - though one of the main players in the story thusfar is a Weapons manufacturing company that is one of the biggest backers of the Nazi-like regime that rules the country where the story begins. It would still be nice to have some sort of firearms rules, beyond what is offered in SM; Cyberspace & Weapon Law. But those are a start, I guess.
Still, I seem to have gotten stuck in the Beisash Way Station at the moment. A nice little spot that I'm only starting to explore.
Nightblade ->--
Too many possibilities, too little time.
-
I am glad you are here OLF. I put the French reference in my post above explicitly to attract your attention.
We could write a story set during the Hundred Years' War. You write the English side whilst I write the French side, so that a GM may play as one side or the other. :)
-
I am glad you are here OLF. I put the French reference in my post above explicitly to attract your attention.
We could write a story set during the Hundred Years' War. You write the English side whilst I write the French side, so that a GM may play as one side or the other. :)
I like that idea, it would be a crazy looking game with two distinctly different voices. The only real consideration is that I am a terrible writer. If you want to have a go then PM me and we can talk it over.
-
I was thinking today that we could do a pretty good Mad Max game even without guns.
The possibilities are amazing just using A&CL.
-
One thing about guns - is they necessitate healing. It's not fantasy roleplaying where healers, herbs, and potions abound.......someone shot will likely die, sooner or later, without healing. And even with healing the recovery time would not be very game friendly.
I would certainly include healing rules as standard. The way you portray healing can set the tone of the entire game. If heroes are fully healed at the end of every scene then that invites a hack and slash approach to everything. If you heroes spend weeks and months in hospital that says something else.
If you don't want the players using guns then operate a 'Bang! You're dead!' system.
My NaGaDeMon game this year has about 25 words about guns, single shot, double tap, 3 round bursts and fully automatic fire but it has several paragraphs plus examples about healing and death. The emphasis is on not fighting, not getting hurt and not killing innocent people. In another twist the demonic creatures are immune to bullets anyway so should a player spray a room with bullets then only innocent people will get hurt.
I've obviously got healing rules figured to a major degree for firearms, and the way crits are structured are also key to this. It's just one of the many things that swing when you shift away from fantasy, even if you're not using guns. How many people died from infections and the like prior to firearms? I think you need to keep that in mind even with the stuff that's being talked about using standard A&CL. No herbs and no magic will shift healing considerably.
-
One thing about guns - is they necessitate healing. It's not fantasy roleplaying where healers, herbs, and potions abound.......someone shot will likely die, sooner or later, without healing. And even with healing the recovery time would not be very game friendly.
I would certainly include healing rules as standard. The way you portray healing can set the tone of the entire game. If heroes are fully healed at the end of every scene then that invites a hack and slash approach to everything. If you heroes spend weeks and months in hospital that says something else.
If you don't want the players using guns then operate a 'Bang! You're dead!' system.
My NaGaDeMon game this year has about 25 words about guns, single shot, double tap, 3 round bursts and fully automatic fire but it has several paragraphs plus examples about healing and death. The emphasis is on not fighting, not getting hurt and not killing innocent people. In another twist the demonic creatures are immune to bullets anyway so should a player spray a room with bullets then only innocent people will get hurt.
I've obviously got healing rules figured to a major degree for firearms, and the way crits are structured are also key to this. It's just one of the many things that swing when you shift away from fantasy, even if you're not using guns. How many people died from infections and the like prior to firearms? I think you need to keep that in mind even with the stuff that's being talked about using standard A&CL. No herbs and no magic will shift healing considerably.
That would just be rubbing salt in the wound of an injured character.
Seriously, if we got official sanction to go ahead and enough people took part we could see a whole spectrum of different implementations from ultra real simulations to fast and light narrative style games.
-
I was thinking today that we could do a pretty good Mad Max game even without guns.
The possibilities are amazing just using A&CL.
A starting place for that one would be the Cyberspace campaign book Death Valley Free Prison. One of my favourite settings books that ICE has produced.
Nightblade ->--
-
Speaking of the British Isles, Peter. How 'bout something with a little bit more Celtic flair - you could do dark age pre-Saxon Brittain with Druids, Bards, the Fæ (Tuatha de Danaan) & even Celtic heroes like Cú Chulainn or Fionn mac Cumhaill.
I guess my Pseudo-Pulp setting could work - though one of the main players in the story thusfar is a Weapons manufacturing company that is one of the biggest backers of the Nazi-like regime that rules the country where the story begins. It would still be nice to have some sort of firearms rules, beyond what is offered in SM; Cyberspace & Weapon Law. But those are a start, I guess.
Still, I seem to have gotten stuck in the Beisash Way Station at the moment. A nice little spot that I'm only starting to explore.
Nightblade ->--
Too many possibilities, too little time.
I know what you mean :)
Nightblade ->--
-
One thing about guns - is they necessitate healing. It's not fantasy roleplaying where healers, herbs, and potions abound.......someone shot will likely die, sooner or later, without healing. And even with healing the recovery time would not be very game friendly.
I would certainly include healing rules as standard. The way you portray healing can set the tone of the entire game. If heroes are fully healed at the end of every scene then that invites a hack and slash approach to everything. If you heroes spend weeks and months in hospital that says something else.
If you don't want the players using guns then operate a 'Bang! You're dead!' system.
My NaGaDeMon game this year has about 25 words about guns, single shot, double tap, 3 round bursts and fully automatic fire but it has several paragraphs plus examples about healing and death. The emphasis is on not fighting, not getting hurt and not killing innocent people. In another twist the demonic creatures are immune to bullets anyway so should a player spray a room with bullets then only innocent people will get hurt.
I've obviously got healing rules figured to a major degree for firearms, and the way crits are structured are also key to this. It's just one of the many things that swing when you shift away from fantasy, even if you're not using guns. How many people died from infections and the like prior to firearms? I think you need to keep that in mind even with the stuff that's being talked about using standard A&CL. No herbs and no magic will shift healing considerably.
Even some historical setting may have this problem. Healing is huge, otherwise you're going to have PCs dying more often & that's going to turn off potential players. Any healing & medical rules need to be easy to understand & use - as well as being realistic enough that we don't paint everything as magic or miracles.
Nightblade ->--
-
Even some historical setting may have this problem. Healing is huge, otherwise you're going to have PCs dying more often & that's going to turn off potential players. Any healing & medical rules need to be easy to understand & use - as well as being realistic enough that we don't paint everything as magic or miracles.
Nightblade ->--
My point exactly, and that's what my rules try to do. The underlying thing is healing and crits in A&CL are both designed (consciously or not) with a robust magical healing environment in mind. Take that away and you need to reassess some things to make sure they still work.
-
Even some historical setting may have this problem. Healing is huge, otherwise you're going to have PCs dying more often & that's going to turn off potential players. Any healing & medical rules need to be easy to understand & use - as well as being realistic enough that we don't paint everything as magic or miracles.
Nightblade ->--
My point exactly, and that's what my rules try to do. The underlying thing is healing and crits in A&CL are both designed (consciously or not) with a robust magical healing environment in mind. Take that away and you need to reassess some things to make sure they still work.
Just don't lose sight of the fact that you are creating a game not a combat simulation.
Where we all know that infection could kill a large proportion of those injured in a battle the default should be that the PCs should be in that small lucky percentage. Therefore, unless some agent is working towards their destruction, the characters should survive even given the lack of magical healing, no antibiotics and poor medical knowledge.
-
RMX used a healing option that was quite useful. I'd re-purpose First aid and treat it like a spell list. Heal a D10 of hits/rank. Then apply that same hit dice/rank to isolated healing and use the thresholds from RMX - ie. Light Wounds 25% Hits, -20, Bleeding up to 5 hits/round etc. Injuries Healed would be stiff & sore etc afterwards. Make it more cinematic.
-
Even some historical setting may have this problem. Healing is huge, otherwise you're going to have PCs dying more often & that's going to turn off potential players. Any healing & medical rules need to be easy to understand & use - as well as being realistic enough that we don't paint everything as magic or miracles.
Nightblade ->--
My point exactly, and that's what my rules try to do. The underlying thing is healing and crits in A&CL are both designed (consciously or not) with a robust magical healing environment in mind. Take that away and you need to reassess some things to make sure they still work.
Just don't lose sight of the fact that you are creating a game not a combat simulation.
Where we all know that infection could kill a large proportion of those injured in a battle the default should be that the PCs should be in that small lucky percentage. Therefore, unless some agent is working towards their destruction, the characters should survive even given the lack of magical healing, no antibiotics and poor medical knowledge.
I haven't lost sight of that. Keep in mind that some groups prefer a higher level of detail than yours might or prefer a grittier game, and it's best to have a system that can accommodate both with a small amount of adjustment. Better First Aid rules make that possible.
-
RMX used a healing option that was quite useful. I'd re-purpose First aid and treat it like a spell list. Heal a D10 of hits/rank. Then apply that same hit dice/rank to isolated healing and use the thresholds from RMX - ie. Light Wounds 25% Hits, -20, Bleeding up to 5 hits/round etc. Injuries Healed would be stiff & sore etc afterwards. Make it more cinematic.
If we were to be writing RMU powered standalone games then you can apply anything you like to any mechanic.
I think if we do ahead with these I would simply ignore the incidence of fatal infections, PCs would be some of the lucky few who survive and recover.
I would also redefine the skill results to make it more narrative in style than the default simulationist approach, I think it downgrades more gracefully.
-
Even some historical setting may have this problem. Healing is huge, otherwise you're going to have PCs dying more often & that's going to turn off potential players. Any healing & medical rules need to be easy to understand & use - as well as being realistic enough that we don't paint everything as magic or miracles.
Nightblade ->--
My point exactly, and that's what my rules try to do. The underlying thing is healing and crits in A&CL are both designed (consciously or not) with a robust magical healing environment in mind. Take that away and you need to reassess some things to make sure they still work.
Just don't lose sight of the fact that you are creating a game not a combat simulation.
Where we all know that infection could kill a large proportion of those injured in a battle the default should be that the PCs should be in that small lucky percentage. Therefore, unless some agent is working towards their destruction, the characters should survive even given the lack of magical healing, no antibiotics and poor medical knowledge.
I haven't lost sight of that. Keep in mind that some groups prefer a higher level of detail than yours might or prefer a grittier game, and it's best to have a system that can accommodate both with a small amount of adjustment. Better First Aid rules make that possible.
That is definitely true. One of the exciting things about this idea is that we could end up with half a dozen different games that are all powered by RMU but really appeal to a whole cross section of the games industry.
-
So I guess the question comes down to: how do the people at ICE feel about this idea?
We can keep brainstorming ideas (which is a great idea); but unless we get a go-ahead from ICE, we're just having a great conversation.
Nightblade ->--
-
So I guess the question comes down to: how do the people at ICE feel about this idea?
We can keep brainstorming ideas (which is a great idea); but unless we get a go-ahead from ICE, we're just having a great conversation.
Nightblade ->--
Very true
-
Forgiveness not permission? LOL
-
I have got a lot to do before the end of the year so if this rumbles on for another 6 weeks then I will not complain.
-
I don't think Nicholas is going to greenlight an idea based solely on a forum post, but you could submit a proposal....
-
I think we are looking more for feedback so that we don't waste our time too. So we can avoid a potential "yes, but" scenario. Maybe an official response saying ICE might be interested in a product produced under these guidelines.
-
I think we are looking more for feedback so that we don't waste our time too. So we can avoid a potential "yes, but" scenario. Maybe an official response saying ICE might be interested in a product produced under these guidelines.
I agree. I understand Nicholas needs actual proposals. However, if ICE isn't even interested in the idea we are discussing, then there is no point putting any work into a proposal that is going to get shot down right away. A "We like the idea, but here's some things we would want to see" or a "Sorry guys & gals, this isn't the direction we think we want to go in" is all we would need to start working (or not) on proposals.
Nightblade ->--
-
So we could bash out the wording of the proposal.
Are we each going to put in a proposal for individual games 'powered by Rolemaster', not my preferred option.
Are we going to propose a contest format with a start and end date, I like that idea.
Are we going to suggest a prize of publication for the best 1, 2, or 3?
Do we need access to just A&CL or do we want/need access to some of the mundane creatures in Creature Law such as dogs and horses? I think horses and dogs and things would be useful as they have always been common status symbols for the warrior class and dogs are a good challenge for even a low level character.
Do we use JDales new tables or use the published ones in Beta2, I would prefer to use JDales updates.
Do we include char gen rules or provide pregen characters? Pregen's take a lot of work out of the project.
As an example I am just a few days away from completing such a challenge. The rules were that we had to use the FUDGE engine at the core of the rules. We had one calendar month to go from concept to having played the game. The prize was just a certificate of completion.
Is there anything else we should include or would want to know? If this works I would love to see a "January, New Year, New Game" annual challenge. As long as everyone knew that they were a game design competition entry and not official ICE games you could have a lot of fun with it.
-
I don't make these decisions, but I would think ICE would want to release anything like this around the time RMU is released, with rules that match. It would be possible to get the creature stats from CrL at that point, so you could just put in a placeholder for those stats.
-
I like the contest idea, though that might intimidate some people who might have great ideas. Some people don't like to enter contests.
CrL would be important, especially for any pseudo-fantasy historical settings (Sphinxes in Egypt for example). Leaving blocks empty would work until CrL is complete (or at least closer to completion, i guess).
Nightblade ->--
-
Waiting for RMU to launch next year, or even 2020 works for me as it gives me time to clear the decks a bit more.
The Grey Ghost/FUDGE competition was very low pressure, you don't even have to share your game publicly and you are only competing for a certificate you have to print yourself if you wanted it.
-
That being said, I just finished detailing nineteen NPCs (plus four less detailed minions) for my Beisash Way Station Starter Pack idea (tied to my fantasy world of Nytheun). I have to say that jDale's RMU NPC Generator for Insperation Pad Pro 3 made the workflow so much quicker. I was even able to convert the randomly generated NPC stats to RM2 stats (which is the system my Nytheun has been built upon).
The process would be even easier for a RMU setting book - i.e. I wouldn't be converting the stats to RM2 (though I might include them & RMSS/RMFRP stats so that the setting is backwards compatible). Again, I have a few ideas already for settings books - my Pseudo-Pulp setting being the top of the list.
This whole conversation has my creative juices flowing and my whole being stoked. ;D
Nightblade ->--
p.s. I should really come up with a better name for that Pseudo-Pulp setting… :-[
-
This whole conversation has my creative juices flowing and my whole being stoked. ;D
Nightblade ->--
p.s. I should really come up with a better name for that Pseudo-Pulp setting… :-[
I understand that. I spend more time in game design groups when I am actually working on a game than I do between games. It is as if all the talk about game ideas gives a creative buzz. It is also somewhere where when you have had a cool idea you can tell everyone about it and they will understand what you mean, you don't have to explain what an RPG is first. You can also chip in when other people have ideas or problems and ask questions when you want advice.
My current project started a debate about pseudo science in RPGs. Some people loved the idea of a scientific basis behind magic and some people, those with the strongest backgrounds in the sciences just found it irritating. I ended up running each individual assertion past a physicist for them to approve or veto. It was kind of cool. There is enough physics hinted at that you can almost fill in the blanks yourself. Most of the physics phrases sound suitably hazy anyway that you really don't need to understand them to get that this is magic.
-
That's very 8), Peter. I've always been a little fascinated by the Science/Magic dynamic. Shadow World does a good job of mixing the two, so did Monte Cook's Dark Space. And if you've ever read RoCoVI, that was pretty much the whole point of the book: mixing Sci-Fi and Fantasy. Going that extra step & getting/using science terminology gives it that extra sense of realism.
Nightblade ->--
-
Something else we would need in the proposal is a definition of how close to RAW we have to stay.
Can we define our own tables for oriental weapons or in a game inspired by Redwall Manor have PCs as mice and villainous rats and weasels can we have rodent PC races?
If we are pitching a game at 6-8year old players then you are unlikely to use RAW critical tables. Don't laugh but I have been playing the the idea of a RolemasterKids for a few years now.
-
Purely for illustrative purposes I have completed my NaGaDeMon game. In total I think this took about 6 days work to go from start to finish. If we went down the month long competition proposal route then I expect most games to be no more polished than this. http://bit.ly/RaisingAzazel-ICE (http://bit.ly/RaisingAzazel-ICE)
-
I'm not laughing. An RM-Kids game is a great idea!
You're right about RAW rules & how much we can modify them. That's important given that RMU is built around fantasy & the settings we've talked about aren't necessarily fantasy.
Nightblade ->--
-
If we are intending these adventures to be essentially community-made starter packs, then I would say we should keep them as close to RAW as possible, so as not to confuse new players. While keeping them close to RAW is a significant limitation, I think everyone here is creative enough to be able to work within that limitation.
-
If we are intending these adventures to be essentially community-made starter packs, then I would say we should keep them as close to RAW as possible, so as not to confuse new players. While keeping them close to RAW is a significant limitation, I think everyone here is creative enough to be able to work within that limitation.
I don't really see it as creating 'adventures' but complete games using RMU core mechanics. So standalone games 'powered by Rolemaster' would be the best description. Of course if we knew what we were allowed to swap out for our own then you can put that in the games synopsis such as "This game uses the core Rolemaster game system but with the critical tables replaced with more age appropriate descriptions."
I could see a simple game aimed at competing against Hero Kids coming in at just 30 or 50 pages but a detailed fantasy greek game could go to hundreds of pages. A Kung Fu game would be in the middle somewhere.
-
Ok, I think we are talking about two separate ideas then:
--I was originally thinking of a basic adventure for RMU that could serve as a starter adventure for the new system. If we could get ICE support we might be able to include some basic things like a few attack tables from the new system, so that these would be ready-to-play starter packs, of the sort that you've been saying RMU could use.
--I think you're thinking here about something a little different, namely, customized RMU rulesets or adventures with some customized rules that adapt RMU to different settings.
I think these are both good ideas. I just think that the first idea is the more pressing one, for me at least, since I don't think RMU has an introductory adventure yet.
-
I agree regarding a RAW starter adventure. In terms of additional things using the game engine...that's another story.
-
--I was originally thinking of a basic adventure for RMU that could serve as a starter adventure for the new system. If we could get ICE support we might be able to include some basic things like a few attack tables from the new system, so that these would be ready-to-play starter packs, of the sort that you've been saying RMU could use.
This seems to be the best route to take. Whatever starter adventure materializes it has to be RAW. We can't release an adventure for brand new folks and say "Here's this new game system we want you to try. Here's an adventure to kick it off, but forget what we have in the ruleset. Our play testers house-ruled A, C, D, and part of F. So you can house-rule those too, but we are still printing the core system as RAW."
We have to showcase the RAW and how it works. If the players want to tweak later, OK.
We had a similar thread to this a while back with regards to 3-4 PCs representing the base professions, 4-5 weapon tables for the weapons those pre-gens would be carrying. (I recall there was a debate on the Spear being included, then needing to include the Staff attack table too.) If we combine all of these great ideas into something that can be presented to ICE, I think we're on to something.
Starter adventure for RAW
4-5 Pre-gen PCs (Melee-type, Thiefly-type, Ranged-type, Pure Spell user, Semi-spell)
Stats for the Pre-gens at level 1 and at level 5
Weapon tables for Sword, dagger, bow, spear/staff
Crit tables for those weapons
We're looking at maybe a dozen pages and we have something we can really push out to players to let them sink their teeth into the game. Heck, I'd love to have that NOW as a beta tester! Cut back all the pages of details, rules, tables, and produce a "Quick Start" and let the players dig deeper into the system.
-
A quickstart adventure is certainly a must for RMU. Make it a free PDF download & put just enough RAW in to make it playable but keep hinting at what else the system can do given the full RAW.
As for the multi-settings ideas Peter & I (& others, really) have been discussing: they would have to be long-term projects, IMHO. Things that would come after the release of RMU - once it has found stable footing in the vast RPG market. I'm still really interested in developing my pseudo-pulp setting (again, I need a better name for it!); but it wouldn't be as important as a RMU Specific Quickstarter.
I still think the Quickstarter should take place in Shadow World - perhaps revolve around the Green Gryphon Inn (so that module might be one of the first "upsell" purchases beyond the RMU Core). I really think ICE should be pushing the setting it has been developing already, instead of having to build a whole new setting just for RMU. I'm sure Terry wouldn't mind the extra marketing of SW in this regard.
Just more of my thoughts…
Nightblade ->--
-
Interesting thread. Looks like many of you have thought about this a lot. Couple things:
"If we are pitching a game at 6-8 year old players then you are unlikely to use RAW critical tables. Don't laugh but I have been playing the the idea of a RolemasterKids for a few years now."
- Don't dumb down the kids. The critical tables are one of the main selling points. 6-8 year-olds are a lot more sophisticated than people understand. 21st century people seem to see them as having to be protected from knowledge. RM-normal is fine.
"I still think the Quickstarter should take place in Shadow World - perhaps revolve around the Green Gryphon Inn (so that module might be one of the first "upsell" purchases beyond the RMU Core). I really think ICE should be pushing the setting it has been developing already, instead of having to build a whole new setting just for RMU."
- I completely agree about pushing the setting.
-
The irony of the possibility of RMU being launched without actually being launched is not lost on me. But, it has been what? Five years?
-
I also agree about the starter pack being based in Shadow World, which already has a devoted following. There was some effort being made toward a crowd-sourced adventure, and a group had been formed to do so, but unfortunately it seems to have ground to a halt.
On a personal level, I would be ecstatic if given the opportunity to create and release material for my New Kingdoms setting (now 26 years old and still going strong), using an RMU engine. I'm working towards releasing some OGL material for it in any case, and am releasing content via my blog, but it was conceived and developed for RM. I'd probably do multi-statted releases for OGL and RMU if such were possible.
-
We have three ideas going on in here.
1. Starter adventures for RMU. I agree that these should be RAW. You cannot do anything else.
2. The quickstart, right now that is an industry standard. Setting it is SW and around the Green Griffin makes a lot of sense.
3. The 'powered by' games. I think these should certainly not be constrained by RAW. The idea is that the core system is being modded to fit the games setting and reach new audiences.
There was a drive to create an adventure path and that is the one that seems to have stalled.
BHanson, Edgcltd and I have plans put out a few system neutral adventure paths next year but they will not include any RM stats. They are a follow on from our 50 adventure hooks we released this year.
-
The ideas and the generally accepted "facts" are really flowing now. it would be awesome if we saw them get picked up and implemented.
Shadow World setting, yes... Green Gryphon Inn... Absolutely! It's one of the more recent releases, it's brilliantly done. I'm currently running two separate campaigns out of Gryphonburg, a set of level 5 PCs and a set of level 2 PCs who had started at level 1. The campaigns are taking place at the same time and the two parties sometimes cross paths and the events and results of one group's adventures impact the other's experience and it's working well. The GGI setting is ideal for low level PCs starting out and higher level PCs with some meat on their bones., there are different adventures included and plenty of NPC's to add colour to the city.
@Nightblade42 PulpMaster!!! Come on. It works. You know it!
@MrApollinax If we are thinking of the same crowd sourced adventure, it's starting to pick up again..... and if we're not talking about the same project, then there is a crowd sourced adventure that's starting to pick up again. LOL
@Implementor Rolemaster-Kids is a brilliant idea. The D&D series is easily more kid-friendly and easier for them to pick up than the complexities of RM (any flavor). A much simpler version of the game for a younger group of kids is excellent. As they get older, they can start to get the standard books and start to adopt the more advanced rule set.
-
@Nightblade42 PulpMaster!!! Come on. It works. You know it!
@MrApollinax If we are thinking of the same crowd sourced adventure, it's starting to pick up again..... and if we're not talking about the same project, then there is a crowd sourced adventure that's starting to pick up again. LOL
Pulpmaster...awesome :o
I think the adventure I'm talking about isn't the same one, sadly.
-
@Nightblade42 - Pulps would actually tie in nicely with the modern system I'm developing. Got a whole series of names for the genre specific stuff, too. It's RM engine based, but with some specific changes to combat, skills, and professions (along with some modifications to character creation to make it more viable when not using purchased stats). The main line has a name, and then each addition tacks another two-word name to the core title.
-
I love Pulpmaster. ;D
Though, Peter & I have been talking (in a con-current thread (http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=18892.0) regarding the naming of the setting) & I'm currently leaning toward Jeopardy Exile. Pulpmaster is a LOT of fun, though! Might have to work that into the by-line.
Nightblade ->--
-
@Nightblade42 - Pulps would actually tie in nicely with the modern system I'm developing. Got a whole series of names for the genre specific stuff, too. It's RM engine based, but with some specific changes to combat, skills, and professions (along with some modifications to character creation to make it more viable when not using purchased stats). The main line has a name, and then each addition tacks another two-word name to the core title.
Sounds very interesting, intothedarkess. My setting isn't strickly Pulp - the biggest difference is that it doesn't take place on Earth, but on an earth-like planet. The main country in the setting (called Viilsatakkul) uses Tesla Coil-like towers that transmit electricity throughout the cities. Every piece of tech (even vehicles) runs on wireless AC power harnessed from these massive towers. It is also ruled by a Fascist Nationalist Party (similar in many ways to the Nazi Party, though less Expansionistic). Check out my Name My Setting Please Thread (http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=18892.0) for more information on the setting.
I've been using RMSS's Pulp Adventures; Black Ops; Weapon Law: Firearms as well as parts of RM2's RoCoVI & Dark Space for setting-specific mechanics (Dark Space for some advanced Tech stuff found in one of the neighbouring countries - which might be a bit of a plot hint ;) ). I know we've discussed in the past the shortcomings of the Firearms rules in Weapon Law; but for my purposes they seem to work well. I'm no firearms expert (I'm a Canuk: I've never even fired a gun. I do own a compound bow and a knife collection, though :D ), but I'd be interested to see the tweaks you've made to the RMSS Firearms RAW.
Nightblade ->--
-
I've actually redone all the attack tables, basing them on actual ballistic information. I used the SM Mark system to a degree to cut the tables down from the whole book to three or four depending on the weapons used. Crit tables are redone as well.
-
That would be simpler to fit into a Powered By Rolemaster type setting book like the ones we've been discussing in this thread.
Nightblade ->--
-
That would be simpler to fit into a Powered By Rolemaster type setting book like the ones we've been discussing in this thread.
Nightblade ->--
Exactly. I've been basing the whole thing off RMU's core layout with specific modifications dictated by my experience running non-magic games. That's why the RMU time lag is somewhat annoying for me...I can't finish some aspects until I know what the final look of A&CL will be.
-
I can understand that. I think we're all waiting for RMU to be finalized. It's been a long process - perhaps a little too long. I hope it has been worth it.
Nightblade ->--
-
So…
Guess the amazing ideas discussed in thsi thread sort of stopped at the brainstorming stage.
Anyone interested in re-igniting the flame & getting some of this off the ground?
Nightblade ->--
-
I just reread the whole thread....
Ok, to sum up where we are. A&CL is in the art-buying stage, maybe Spell Law is too. Treasure Law has completed editing. Creature Law is close to being ready for editing. I even just submitted the completed Character Companion for editing, so, bonus book! We have another person on board to do layout instead of just overloading Terry. So things are looking good for a release.
There are a ton of ideas in this thread. Quick start, intro modules/starter sets, mini settings, great! ICE is now at a place where we can look at proposals for RMU products, and I'm now the RMU line editor so you don't have to compete for Nicholas' limited time and attention. If it looks like there is something worth pursuing, we can do NDAs and get you drafts of the rules, so you are working with the final rules and not just the beta. I can also have conversations now about ideas that haven't yet made it to the stage of being a full proposal if you want early feedback.
-
You might want to sticky that post JDale for anyone who is wondering where RMU is at, as well as those interested in contributing.
-
That's great news jDale - & congrats on the Line Editor position. That's awesome! 8)
So how would ICE feel about the idea discussed in this thread: i.e. the "Powered by RMU" line of settings? And is Shadow World the official RMU setting?
Nightblade ->--
-
I could see something intended as a streamlined ruleset that serves as a quick entry point to Rolemaster. E.g. Run Out The Guns or RMX. That seems useful. Of course, in some ways RMU is already more simplified than RMX! E.g. we got rid of the base spell attack table, the RR table, and simplified the moving maneuver table quite a bit. And we already have goal-based XP. But for example an RMU-X might only have the simple rounds version of combat, and maybe you could collapse most of the skills down to whole categories (perhaps picking one specialization, looking at the list actually I think that would work pretty well for a fast-moving easy-setup game).
A campaign path, either on its own or combined with something like the above, also seems promising.
Something that is a complete and fully fledged game based on RMU, not streamlined or simplified, but with enough changes that it merits packaging those core rules in it all over again, is essentially a larger project like Spacemaster. There's going to be a lot of repeated content, if you already have RMU you're essentially buying the core rules twice, and it will have to be either a really big product or have multiple books of its own. I think this is too early for something like that -- not that there could never be a place for it, but we need some material to support RMU first. At this stage, I think it would be better to have a setting/campaign book that works with A&CL, even if it doesn't necessarily work with, say, Spell Law (e.g. a historical setting with no magic). Best if it has material that can be used both in its own setting and adapted into other settings, which could be professions, spell lists, talents, creatures, etc. A lot of RM is about making your own things, but pieces that can be mixed and matched are pretty useful for that.
We'd also be interested in companions of various sorts as appeared in previous editions of course.
-
But for example an RMU-X might only have the simple rounds version of combat...
I think that has a lot of merit. Offering only the Simple Round makes it possible to simplify several other things (e.g. it allows you to cut out the movement chart and just charge AP to move).
and maybe you could collapse most of the skills down to whole categories (perhaps picking one specialization, looking at the list actually I think that would work pretty well for a fast-moving easy-setup game).
Possibly, though it might turn off RM2 players, who might think that you just buy categories in RMU. Introducing different mechanics is a bit different than cutting out charts.
It might be better just to cut out the skill resolution charts, and have simple success at 101+. That would make this the most 'chartless' version of RM yet, which might have a lot of marketing appeal.
We'd also be interested in companions of various sorts as appeared in previous editions of course.
Hmmm... that made me think of offering an 'Old School' companion oriented towards enabling RM2 players to play a version of RMU modified to be more like RM2. This would include my individual skill costs mod, most of the classes I've made (which are revamped versions of RM2 classes such as Warrior Mage, Armsmaster, etc.), and hope to make (Necromancer, Archmage), most of the revised spell lists I and Eladan have made (Bard, Druid, Ranger, Astrologer, Mystic, etc.). We might also be able to remake versions of the various races that appeared in the RM2 Companions.
-
That's a good starting point, jDale. I agree, something you can play "out of the box" using A&CL would be best - without modifications, or at least minimal ones to fit the setting (i.e. no iron weapons/armour in Ancient Greece). Perhaps a new version of some of the Campaign Classics series (Robin Hood, Mythic Greece, Mythic Egypt, &c…). I think it was Spectre that was talking about developing a Celtic/Druid setting - which would be very interesting.
And yes Hurin, a RM2 - RMU companion would be a great project, IMHO.
Nightblade ->--
-
It's been a long, sad process to see the new edition not released over a period of...10 years. Yes, a full decade. A book doesn't take 10 years to write. A system of several books, with a team working on it: same thing. It doesn't take 10 years unless there are long months and years when the "writers" don't so much as crack open their Windows Explorer "Rolemaster" folders. And we haven't been told the truth about that. If you follow the monthly updates, as I stopped doing half a decade ago, it was always "process X is next up in the queue". But that wasn't really the case, was it? Otherwise we would have seen something since the playtest files in 2015.
Look, the team owes us nothing, I guess. But I wish there was honesty and transparency. You, the RMU team, all have lives and day jobs and RMU is priority #76 and never had a chance. That's life.
But over 10 years, a lot happens. RM is effectively a fossil. It was clinging on a decade ago, now, it's dust.
-
And yes Hurin, a RM2 - RMU companion would be a great project, IMHO.
I don't know... We all want different things about RMU, that's for sure, but what I absolutely do not is a clone of RM2 (because I already have RM2) or an "improved" version of RM2 (because, over the past thirty-five years, I made enough house rules that I consider my version of RM2 to be the "best" improved version of RM2 possible for me).
I want something that feels like a RM product, yet is different enough from all previous versions that I'd be willing to buy it. Honestly, Hurin, no offense meant but I always felt that, all in all, you don't really want to move away from RM2. Following your advice, I'd say that (most) RM2 players and GM would then just think that RMU is so much RM2 that it's not worth moving to it. IMO, it's better to focus on how different it is (i.e., what changed) rather than how much it's still just the same (by trying to make it look like RM2).
-
Honestly, Hurin, no offense meant but I always felt that, all in all, you don't really want to move away from RM2.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but personally I don't see it that way. You are right that I am more RM2 than RMSS, and that I do try to add an RM2 perspective to the development of RMU. But I do this primarily because I feel the design team is mostly (perhaps exclusively?) RMSS folks, and they tend to default to RMSS. I want RMU to be balanced, taking the best of both RM2 and RMSS (and adding new stuff to help solve old problems or add new elements) so that it can appeal to both camps, and truly be a Rolemaster Unified.
I also try to add a historical perspective that explains why things are the way they are in previous editions of RM (e.g. why did Instantaneous Actions get changed 75% activity to 0% activity?), so that we can understand the designers' original intent and balance, and appreciate how errors and misunderstandings crept in; and that often involves doing some digging and some archaeology into RM2 and RM1. So, I just wanted to say, that's where I'm coming from.
-
For all the trouble we sometimes have with RM2. Now doing house rules etc to fix it.
From what ive seen of RMU its a RM/GURPS/5e morph. Ill rather play the systems by them self.
But I still exited to see where it ends, and hope for the best.
-
I have to agree, Malim. I totally understand that from a business perspective ICE needs something new & needs to invest its resources into the new edition. And I also believe that ICE needs to go back to what worked so well for them in the early years: a great campaign setting with lots of adventures & campaign support. Yes, they no longer have a liscence for Middle Earth, but Shadow World is an amazing setting & there's already a lot of products published for it that would only need an RMU update to make them playable with the new edition. Yes, there's a community of long time players who have their favourite editions & their own sets of house rules (my RM2 based RM2/SM2/RMSS with a few RMUisms bastard of a frankenstein ruleset I use, for example). And you'll probably never truly convert us all. But to get "new blood" into the game, you need to find something that will draw in new players/GMs while giving us old hands some new ideas to add to our own convoluted house-ruled games.
I firmly believe this is the best course for ICE & RMU. But that's my opinion & I don't call the shots at ICE. But if I can help with creating content to help promote RMU to keep this game we all love alive, then I am willing to do that. And I'm sure there are many other members of this great community who would do the same.
My 2¢'s (which are Canadian cents, so really my 1.65 US¢'s ;) ).
Nightblade ->--
-
Honestly, Hurin, no offense meant but I always felt that, all in all, you don't really want to move away from RM2.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but personally I don't see it that way. You are right that I am more RM2 than RMSS, and that I do try to add an RM2 perspective to the development of RMU. But I do this primarily because I feel the design team is mostly (perhaps exclusively?) RMSS folks, and they tend to default to RMSS. I want RMU to be balanced, taking the best of both RM2 and RMSS (and adding new stuff to help solve old problems or add new elements) so that it can appeal to both camps, and truly be a Rolemaster Unified.
I also try to add a historical perspective that explains why things are the way they are in previous editions of RM (e.g. why did Instantaneous Actions get changed 75% activity to 0% activity?), so that we can understand the designers' original intent and balance, and appreciate how errors and misunderstandings crept in; and that often involves doing some digging and some archaeology into RM2 and RM1. So, I just wanted to say, that's where I'm coming from.
I am glad you have done this Hurin. And yes, I admit I am also more fond of the RM2 ruleset than any of the rulesets that have been developed since (including RMU). Perhaps the name of the new edition is the problem. I don't see it as truly unifying the RM2/RMC & the RMSS/RMFRP branches of the game. I really do see it as a third ruleset whose basis is on the RM lineage it was developed from, but there are a lot of completely new things in RMU that (for me) draw it away from that lineage as well. But, as I said above - ICE needs something new to keep RM afloat in the ever expanding market of tabletop RPGs & the ever dwindling number of new players taking up this hobby.
Odd brainstorm idea that just hit me: maybe ICE & Terry A. should partner with a video game producer & create a Shadow World video game to help promote RMU when it's finally ready to be released. That would bring in some new blood & even a new revenue stream.
Sorry, about the aside…
At any rate, I'm glad that you tried to keep RMU faithful to RM's roots, Hurin. I am truly grateful you have championed that for the community.
Nightblade ->--
-
Honestly, at this point I just want them to launch the kickstarter already, or publish the books without it, but in any case, just finally GET ON WITH IT.
-
Odd brainstorm idea that just hit me: maybe ICE & Terry A. should partner with a video game producer & create a Shadow World video game to help promote RMU when it's finally ready to be released. That would bring in some new blood & even a new revenue stream.
The sad irony is that, just as ICE was going bankrupt in the mid 90s, it launched a venture with the videogame Dark Age of Camelot, which used Rolemaster as the basis of its class and spell systems. It was essentially a Rolemaster MMO set in Dark Age Europe. ICE folded before the game came out, so all the RM elements had to be stripped out of it. Some have speculated that, had ICE been able to last a little longer, the revenue from DAoC (which was quite profitable) might have allowed ICE to survive the lean times... but we'll never know for sure.
-
You're right, we'll never know - unfortunately :(
Nightblade ->--
-
Well, we also know about the MERP debacle. Had ICE been able to keep the rights to it until after the first movie came out, it may have been to profit from its success and survive... Who knows?
-
Well, we also know about the MERP debacle. Had ICE been able to keep the rights to it until after the first movie came out, it may have been to profit from its success and survive... Who knows?
Yeah, that would have probably been even more money. ICE lost the Tolkien license in 1999 IIRC, and Fellowship of the Ring came out in 2001... those two short years!
-
I have always wondered if Tolkien Enterprises could have requested that that iteration of ICE release the MERP license voluntarily, rather than force them into bankruptcy to accomplish that same thing (or maybe they did and ICE thought they could pull out of the tailspin). At least then they'd have their rights to re-sell, which was their intent with the movies coming out, and ICE may have still been able to survive. Somewhat debatable as they obviously had to be in a poor position for T.E. to be able to do force them into bankruptcy if the first place. Some of that could have been blamed on the UPS strike and paper cost fluctuations too I suppose. Still, who knows, as much as T.E. has a very unfriendly reputation maybe those running ICE at the time ticked them off somehow and T.E. decided to make a point. The relationship between that ICE and it's freelancers was starting to deteriorate at that point also.
-
Honestly, at this point I just want them to launch the kickstarter already, or publish the books without it, but in any case, just finally GET ON WITH IT.
I'll echo this. I'd like to have a look at the new rules in whatever the first book ends up being and and see if the entire system is worth buying but it doesn't seem like that will ever happen.
-
I also have to agree with Cory, as much as I would like to I just can't bring myself around to liking RMU. There are some interesting things that I do like but I'll have to see if I can Frankenstein them into my existing campaign. I wish I did love it. What I would truly love is a reorganizing of RMFRP and some updates.
-
I'm afraid, like MANY others I suspect, that I wasn't convinced that a major overhaul of the RM system (whichever of the two main ones you favoured) was particularly necessary to start with.. Though, as RM devotees, we probably would've tried (and possibly applied), at least PARTS, of whatever was produced... then may just have gone back to what we knew (and probably already house-ruled to our own satisfaction).
Time has dragged on however... and now, as the behemoth task of RMU nears ever closer to completion... I've grown older (but not necessarily wiser)... in that time I've found other games and systems that have filled the void... will I buy the new version of RM? Possibly. But with each year, it's getting increasingly more likely that it will just become another of those games we collectors buy then just squirrel away unused only occasionally being glanced at through rose-tinted spectacles.. :(
-
If RMU want to succed, it has to be on roll20 or other online platform! Sad truth theese days.
-
If RMU want to succed, it has to be on roll20 or other online platform! Sad truth theese days.
Hence, my constant harping on how badly we need a good Roll20 sheet for RMU.
-
If you want that sheet, someone has to pay a coder to make it or code it them self.
My guess is, if you want functions as what 5e sheet has.. you looking at 200 hours +
-
Dupe post - sorry
-
If you want that sheet, someone has to pay a coder to make it or code it them self.
My guess is, if you want functions as what 5e sheet has.. you looking at 200 hours +
It is a behemoth - even with modding the existing RMFP sheet, and building some HTML code generators in Google Sheets. And that is just for Player use - I can't even begin to imagine coding monsters for the DM to use....
Couple that with the fact that Roll20 does not do 100OE rolls like Rolemaster requires (meaning complicated roll templates, and you can't tie dice resolution into table results), and the fact that the rules are a bit squishy still, and the fact that people want it to be a character creation tool as well (It can be, but the last thing the sheet needs is scope creep right now). Well - it got overwhelming. I still dabble in coding on it, but I have lost momentum.
-
I am sorry it is such a vast undertaking.
I know nothing of coding, but I do know that the ERA has a character builder, and once the RMU module is published, players will I assume be able to use it to build characters. I wonder if it would save any time to use that as the builder, then just make a conversion/importing tool for Roll20?
Alternatively, I know my players currently use DnD Beyond to roll and run their characters. Somehow it is integrated with Roll20: they can click a skill in DnD Beyond and we can all see the result in Roll20. I wonder how hard that would be to do for the ERA. But if it were possible, you wouldnt even need a character sheet for Roll20. You could just run your character from the ERA.
-
Roll20 can do 100OE, that is just a macro that is not that hard to make, they call it exploding dice or something.
I did a test of it in our RM2 sheet!
-
From the Roll20 wiki:
Exploding Dice
Roll20 supports exploding dice -- you may also know it as "rule of 6", "rule of 10s", or "acing" depending on your game system. With exploding dice, if you roll the maximum number on the dice (a 6 with a d6, a 10 with a d10, etc.) you get to re-roll again and add the additional roll to your total for that roll. If the additional roll is also a maximum number, you get to keep rolling!
To perform a roll with exploding dice, just add an exclamation point after the number of sides in the formula. For example, /roll 3d6! would roll 3 d6 dice with exploding re-rolls. You can also define the exploding point for the dice using the greater-than and less-than symbols. For example, /roll 3d6!>4 would explode on any dice greater-than or equal-to 4. /roll 3d6!3 would explode only if a 3 is rolled.
/roll 10d6!
Compounding Exploding Dice (Shadowrun-Style Exploding Dice)
Shadowrun (and some other systems) use a special style of exploding dice where the the additional rolls for each dice are added together as a single "roll". To do this, just use two exclamation marks instead of one. So for example to roll 5 d6's, you would do /roll 5d6!!. A common Shadowrun roll would be exploding dice compared to a target number, for example /roll {5d6!!}>8 (notice the use of the brackets to show that we don't mean "explode on anything greater than 8", but rather "explode on 6's compounding, then compare to 8 for successes). Even though the target number (8) is higher than the possible roll from a single die, with the compounding exploding rolls a single roll can be infinitely high!
/roll {5d6!!}>8
-
I am sorry it is such a vast undertaking.
So am I. I would love to have a working character sheet. I did one for Gamma World 2e, but RMU is a whole nother ball of wax. It is what it is, I guess.
I know nothing of coding, but I do know that the ERA has a character builder, and once the RMU module is published, players will I assume be able to use it to build characters. I wonder if it would save any time to use that as the builder, then just make a conversion/importing tool for Roll20?
This would be optimal. However you would for sure need a working Roll20 Character sheet first. Also it involves an HTML parser that I have no idea how to use - and ERA would need to spit out XML/HTML.
Alternatively, I know my players currently use DnD Beyond to roll and run their characters. Somehow it is integrated with Roll20: they can click a skill in DnD Beyond and we can all see the result in Roll20. I wonder how hard that would be to do for the ERA. But if it were possible, you wouldnt even need a character sheet for Roll20. You could just run your character from the ERA.
This would be beyond awesome, but that would probably mean some sort of licensing deal, and ERA would need to be web enabled and use the roll20 API. I am sure there are fees involved with that. I wouldn't hold out hope for that one.
-
Roll20 can do 100OE, that is just a macro that is not that hard to make, they call it exploding dice or something.
I did a test of it in our RM2 sheet!
From the Roll20 wiki:
<snipped for brevity>
So all that is only half the story. Roll20 only does open ended rolls for high rolls. Thing is RoleMaster also has low end rolls. You can simulate the RoleMaster rolls by declaring a fumble which triggers a separate downroll, but essentially it will not total the downroll with the original roll. This means the total roll can not be applied to table results, and worse still they require spaghetti code roll templates that are a bear to get right and test, and all for just telling the user that you need to manually subtract this roll from that. (Technically, this is not true for weapon attacks, since they have a fumble range, and not a downroll)
One might argue that fumbles happen so infrequently, you can go ahead and apply the roll to a results table, and get the user to recalc and manually reference the table if they downroll. I guess that is a solution, but I don't like it much - too much room for error and frustration. Maybe I could say - don't reference a table if you fumble.... Let me think on that.
As an aside, I have asked for them to add in RoleMaster style 100OE rolls, but it never reached 10 votes so it got ignored.
You can do it with access to scripts. Thing is - not everyone has access to that. I could put a check to see if they do, but if I don't put in the code to handle it without scripts then the sheet doesn't work for most of Roll20 - so what is the point then?
-
Okay, let me check, because im pretty sure that we have a macro for it!
And that can be directly coded into "buttons"
-
Okay, let me check, because im pretty sure that we have a macro for it!
And that can be directly coded into "buttons"
Yeah - what you do is build a macro in the sheet and call that macro with buttons. It's very elegant, and I use it in my sheet. You still do a separate downroll however. There is no way around it unless you use API scripts or Roll20 codes the 100OE roll method into the dice roller.
I hope I am mistaken, or maybe something has changed and I missed it.
-
This may prove useful. I have yet to parse how it might help for open ended rolls.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/10198082/now-on-dev-server-custom-roll-parsing-for-character-sheets/?pageforid=10198082#post-10198082
It looks like it now passes the rolls made to an array that you can loop through in the template. If I got that right, we may be in business for proper d100OE rolls.
-
I know you all have been talking about Roll 20 and for years that's what I used as well. However, Foundry VTT is the direction that a program should be worked on for RMU or any of the versions. It is the one that a large portion of Roll 20 players either are switching to or have already switched to. I don't regret leaving Roll 20 with all it's limitations. Also Foundry VTT already has open up and down D100 rolling. It is the system that should be looked at for a starting place for Rolemaster.
-
This may prove useful. I have yet to parse how it might help for open ended rolls.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/10198082/now-on-dev-server-custom-roll-parsing-for-character-sheets/?pageforid=10198082#post-10198082
It looks like it now passes the rolls made to an array that you can loop through in the template. If I got that right, we may be in business for proper d100OE rolls.
That's good news. For some reason that link didn't work for me (it just led to my own Roll20 home page), but I was able to see the Roll20 wiki's description here:
https://wiki.roll20.net/Custom_Roll_Parsing
-
Foundry VTT already has open up and down D100 rolling. It is the system that should be looked at for a starting place for Rolemaster.
Ideally, we'd have support for both, because while I like Foundry (and my group might move to it eventually), I do find Roll20 a bit more accessible and I think it is still the most popular VTT right now by a fair margin. The Orr Group Report, for example, still looks to Roll20 for its stats.
-
I agree about Foundry being a bit daunting when you first start. However for those that have started on Roll20 and have gotten into the idea of VTT and how it is suppose to work, crossing over isn't too much of a problem. There are a lot of YouTube videos out there to help new people and there is also a support board and Discord board.
I think that Roll20 really has seen its hay day and more and more players are converting over to Foundry. I can't code a bit but I know there are those out there that can and it would be nice if those in the community that could would develop content for it.
On the the other hand I don't see ICE doing much to help its self in this regard. Most of the pushing if not all is being done by it's fan base.
As for me, I'm tired of waiting on the new RMU. I'm satisfied with RMSS "what we play with". I just wish they would open it up for developers for new content modules. I've been playing for over 30 years heck since it first came out and have content for my group but I can't do anything with it as far as putting it out there for others.
For example;
Look at "Rolemaster Combat minion" a online aide which I use and depend on every other week in my game. It is a great helper and does all the heavy lifting in combat, even keeping track of all the HP, bloodloss per round, and stuns and applying crits which it looks up. The guy who developed it has been begging someone to take it over, I've seen his posts here on the board. As far as I know ICE had not done anything to help or to offer to take it over. It would only benefit them in the long run if they would because it takes a part of the game which is daunting for some people and makes it all instantaneous so play continues to run smoothly. If it goes down I'm back to having to chart look and to keeping track of everything for combat by hand. Heck the system is so nice it even keeps a record of your combat session that you can look at and review.
Sorry a bit off the topic and rambly.
-
No one at ICE has the necessary skills to take over Combat Minion. It would be great if someone were to do so, but it wouldn't help anyone if ICE took it over and then was not able to keep it running.
-
Would it be possible to contract it out to a third party? I have no knowledge of that business, but just thought I'd ask.
I'm currently running RMU in Roll20, and it has not been easy. More support would definitely be welcome.
-
I agree it wouldn't help if they couldn't keep it running. That is why you get someone on board to do that. They need to start thinking about all the different VTT's and how they can tap into that market. As of now I believe at least for Roll 20 and Foundry it's all fan base who is pushing things forward.
I'm sorry I'm just tired and frustrated. How long have we been waiting for the new RM? Years... and it's not even as good as what they have already put out.
-
Hurin,
I'm also running a RM game, but on Foundry through Forge. I have a RMFRP game that plays every other Saturday. I've been working with James who has an add on world system called GRPGA which is a generic game system. He is very willing to help get tings going on RM such as specific forms but he's also doing other systems especially "Against The DarkMaster". Good thing is that a lot of the set up things for that game can be used for RM since it is a close cousin of RM games system.