Topic: RMC and RMFRP. What made you choose one or the other ?

[runequester]

Following on the other thread, to people who have read or ideally played both versions (either RM2/RMC or RMFRP/RMSS), what made you choose one or the other (assuming you did so)

Im not as interested in "default" answers (f.x. you played RM2 for years and never bought FRP, or FRP was the only thing available and you never read RM2). What Im looking for is people who actively made a choice between the two, and what motivated that choice

Please keep it civil, though these message boards seem very friendly and non-flaming.

[jeff]

What I like about RMFRP is the skill categories. Its much nicer at higher levels just buying the categories and raising up all the skills at once. I also like spell list development better.

[PiXeL01]

Well I started with Rm2 back in the days, but did venture into the RMFRP system through varies books I bought just to get more to read (and my own books since I was using the ones my friends owned through the first many years) as well as through SPAM, the sci fi variant of RMFRP.

I have seen both camps, but what keeps on drawing me to RMC is that it seems like complicated and time consuming to create characters. You dont have to " bother" with Training package (though these can give more inspiration to Backgrounds and none-numbered character development) and I dont really like the catagory/skill system.

Another quarrel I have with the RMFRP is the Talent system. It can be exploited too much and incourages min/maxing imho.

One thing I did like about the RMFRP was the way combat turns were handled with snap/normal/deliberate actions. Takes longer though, but also grants more to be considered.

[markc]

 I like RMSS because of the skill system and the way skills and categories interact. I have recosted and removed some talents to better suit my low power talent style game. I use my own combat system that meshes well with RM skills but I am not too sure about how firearms and such will mesh with it, I did some basic tests with SM:P in a campaign but I still think there might be some bugs. I have also found it easy to covert other things in other systems to RM because of the fact it is a d100 system. But I think that conversion would also work well with RM2/C/X.
 So I think you can see I take things I like nand add things I think my game needs. Since it is my game I add stuff from any system I like or if I find something better I will change rules on the fly. But having said that since I switched from RuneQuest I have not found a better system and I do not think there will be one for me but the future is the future.
MDC     

[yammahoper]

I started with RM2, and when RMSS came out I was automatically very curious.  However, I owned ALL of the RM2 line and was a bit reluctant to swap.

The first book I bought was the RMSS Arms Law.  I loved the changes, particularly in breakage rules.  I thought the new way to show damage on the crit tables was very smart and left more room for descriptive text, which I like.

So I ordered Spell Law, and REALLY liked the new profession list and the filled out, more complete old list.  The Paladin was a work of beauty that completely fixed the horror he had become in the companions.  So I ordered RMSS rule book.

The book arrived and was read through a few times before I decided to change over characters.  I never liked the level bonus system in RM2, even if only applied to weapons, and while there was more complex book keeping, I am no woosy afraid of a little paper work for improved balance.  I play RM after all, not Toon, because I LIKE complexity, and the skill system seemed to offer some nice complexity indeed.

What really sold me on the skill system were the changes that brought skills down from rediculously high numbers (I have never been a fan of or impressed by BIG for the sake of BIG) to a more meaningful range that allowed easier measurement of ability in PC's.  It would take a lenient GM to allow a skill over 160, with 145 being a more common high end skill total.  In addition, the skill system boosted skill averages at lower levels, making survival of PC's easier.

So I stuck with RMSS.  When RMFRP came out, I wanted to see how RM looked in one book, and after getting that, decided I would support the company and buy the rest, if I needed it or not.  Also, the RMFRP rule book made it very easy to give away as a gift and bring in new RM players, which I have done three times.

All in all, I like RMSS/FRP.  Of course, I like RM2 too.  Mostly, I look forward to the future revision that will unite the two systems.

lynn

[Arioch]

I started with RMFRP, recently I've took a look on RMC but I've decided to stay with the 4th edition. Why?
- I like the categories system: you can decide to make a "generalist" character, raising the categories, or a "specialist" character, raising only the skill under them, or something in the middle.
- Plus, there are tons of skills to choose, we don't use all of them but I like the fact that the skills are there if you want to use them.
- I really like the spell casting/ learning system: IMHO one of the best around.
- I like the three phases combat: gives you a lot of tactical options!
RMC is good, and I use some option from it in my RMFRP games (last but not least those from the awesome new Combat Compaion!), but I overall I prefer RMFRP.

[dutch206]

I like RM Classic because it has fewer skills.  I prefer perception as a single skill as opposed to: Alertness, Sense Ambush, Detect Traps, lie perception, locate hidden, observation, poison perception, reading tracks, surveillance, tracking, Direction sense, reality awareness, sense awareness, situational awareness, spatial location awareness, and time sense. 

On the other hand, RMSS has wonderfully balanced spell lists with fewer blank spaces.  I also prefer individual spell development, which for some reason I only associate with RMSS.

[vroomfogle]

I use RMSS Spell Law because it's more balanced, more complete, with 3 new sets of base lists over RMC.

I use RMSS Creatures & Monsters because it's a single book with everything I might want in it

I use most of the RMSS Companions (Essence, Ment, Chan, Arcane)...at least for the spell lists

I use RMC's Tactical Round Sequence

For Character Law (Professions, Skills) I use my own system since I think RMC is too simple and missing too many important skills while having many unncessary skills and RMSS skill system is too nonsensical and overboard with skills.

But I use SoHK for skill descriptions, and for the Skill static maneuver tables.

[Pit Ote]

I guess I was happy with RM2 and the changes introduced into RMSS didn't get to make me happier. My main problem with SS/FRP is the skill system and the effects on some basics (stats, professions).

It was a pity to have to choose  .

[big_country_wi]

while i have only run a couple test sessions so far, im leaning heavily towards RMC.  i first picked up RMFRP and read through it and loved it.... except for the skill system.  holy crap, it took me 4 hours to roll up a new character the first time.  now, i can use those rules and create a 1st lvl char in about 2 hours now.... but still.  Also, there are so many skills in FRP that it gets really hard to remember all those nifty little skills you should buy... and everytime i built a character, i forgot a mountain of them.  Now, eventually, i would get the hang of it, and so would my players... but they decided to say hell no to FRP... pity for me, haha.

so i bought the pdfs for RMC.  and i loved it instantly.  i love the way stat bonuses are handled, how stats are generated, the simpler RR system, and the skills really sold me.  the primary list has just what you need to have to run an action packed game, the sort my group is used to switching over from dnd 3.5.  but, the secondary list expands and allows for more detail in a character for those that wish to use it.  the background option system in RMC is also much better in my opinion, as there are enough options to start with, and you can add in your own options later.  I like the combat system even better, while snap, normal, and deliberate actions do make for some great tactical advantages, you can normally accomplish the same in a combat round with short and long actions, and it doesnt slow the round down as much.

im looking forward to seeing the combat companion and what it does for the game, and also i will be picking up HARP in the near future, just to see what i like from there.  Overall, i dont think ICE has ever done anything badly, just differently and to each individuals personal tastes without their games losing the "ICE" feel to them.

[Justin]

well, I'm almost a default answer. I started as a player of RM2. Few years later when I was ready to start building my own setting, I bought RMFRP main book.
I liked the skill category thing. I thought that covered the similar skills thing quite nicely, even if not 100%.
But making racial assumptions(Elves getting fletching cheaper, etc.) really made me double think about using it. And then the stat numbers were different, and though that was a "but i'm used to it this way" issue, that tiny straw broke the camel's back. Oh, and I don't like Talents, either. So, mostly it was Talents and racial costs for skills.

[Der Graumantel]

I was playing merp many years, when i picked up RM2. It didn?t  satisfy me at all. It was not far from merp,i e had the same problems.
When I got RMFRP I found all my concerns about RM solved.

Skill system: I loved the clearness with the differrent progressions instead of the exeption rules in RM2 (like ambush, spell lists and stuff) and like the category/single skill system, though there are to many skills (had to cut them done) and I would never create a character without computer help.

Spell system: I like that spells became skills and think the spell casting modifications table much easier to work with, than the RM2 mods. its cleaner and more generic.

Combat system: Not many changes, but i like the more mechanic crit descriptons better. Oh, and i think the three divided combat round offers nice tactical options.

This is why I like RMFRP far better

Ben

[runequester]

My main reservation with RMFRP is the same as with GURPS. Love the system, but its easy to miss this or that skill, and realize that you're screwed later on. In GURPS its not a big deal, because skills are cheap.
With RM, you have to wait till you level, so it can be a bigger deal.

[yammahoper]

With RM, you have to wait till you level, so it can be a bigger deal.

If the missing skill is that vital and one your PC should have OBVIOUSLY been training or had access to, then the GM should let you take a minute and redistribute some points so you can buy the skill.

It IS a game.  Them numbers aint set in stone

lynn

[markc]

My main reservation with RMFRP is the same as with GURPS. Love the system, but its easy to miss this or that skill, and realize that you're screwed later on. In GURPS its not a big deal, because skills are cheap.
With RM, you have to wait till you level, so it can be a bigger deal.

 I give out DP's at every 1/3 of a level so it tends to fix this problem. I believe I wrote how I do it down in the house rules paper I wrote that is in the vault on ICE's website.
 If my system does not work just change the rules so it fits your style of play. Maybe only give stat increases every 3 mini levels and devide the DP by 3 so you all get DP faster. But be sure to try and keep the max number of skill ranks you can buy the same or the system can get out of hand quickly.
MDC

[runequester]

Yeah, good points. It can make the math a bit screwy though.

Im fine with improvising, but for the first campaign of any system, I try to run it as by-the-book as possible, just to have a solid basis before we start messing with things

[PiXeL01]

Kinda off topic, the way I fixed the essential skill missing problem in my most recent campaign of SM2 (sci fi just with RM2/C rules) was I took away one of each characters background options and then gave them 20 ranks distributed over skills I knew would be suitable for the type of campaign and characters they would be playing. This is one way to handle it, but it is in a way only usable in a themed campaign (this is Cops in Space). Others would argue 20 ranks for a BO is alot, but since everyone gets the same amount in the same skills it doesnt unbalance anyone. I know Arms Companion says 10 pr BO on this issue, but oh well.

But yeah, I have also given players a chance to redistribute DPs during play if a really needed skill is missing, or sometimes just throw a free rank at them. What ever keeps the game running and fun for everyone. Sometimes though it is funny to see how your players handle a situation without that skill though

[David Johansen]

For me it was the additive stat bonuses, the stat generation, the stat gain rolls, the more even handed development point awards, the skill category system (which could use a little cleaning up but it doesn't really need it), the adolescence ranks as the character's culture, training packages, the simple codes on the critical tables, and the improved spell lists.

RM2 always looked like a half finished idea with too many optional varients in the companions.  RMSS is just that, a STANDARDIZED SYSTEM.

[Aelfbeorn]

My choice is RMFRP (well,actually RMSS).  My reasons were:

1) The skill categories. I don't necessarily like buying ranks in skill categories, but I prefer the actual categories to those in RMC/RM2 (although I would like to see a Medical category).

2) RMSS/RMFRP Cultures (although I prefer how HARP seperates race and culture).

3) RMSS/RMFRP Profession bonuses

4) RMSS/RMFRP Training packages

5) RMSS Spell Law

6) RMSS/FRP Chanelling Companion

7) RMSS Essence Companion

8 RMSS/FRP Martial Arts Companion