Topic: Shadow World a a RM2/Classic system? Conversion required for other RM systems?

[Malleable]

So my GM will most likely be starting a RM campaign.  Maybe Middle Earth, as she is familiar with it, but I've always wanted to play in Shadow World given how immense and detailed it is.

She used the RM2 system before, but in case we move to one of the other systems, is there a lot of work to use Shadow World?

[Tommi]

If you want to change to other RM version, there is no need to change anything. Newer material has also RMSS stats but they are quite close to each other - in RMSS stat blocks for NPCs there are more skills mentioned and some skills are in RMSS range but that is about it. Even most melee OB's and DB's are the same (while they shouldn't).

If you compare RM2 Creatrures & Treasures (1&2) monsters to RMSS Creatures & Monster you'll notice the same difference - practically nothing: only spell lists, power points and some rare critical charts differ. Hits, OB's, DB's, size.. are the same. One would think that they recalculated monsters but - no they didn't. I was actually very displeased about this in 90's... However now I find it easy - I can pick what ever book  and it doesn't matter.   

FWIW - I have run SW with  both RM2 and RMSS so I might be too familiar to both the systems and setting to give answer that helps you. 

[Terry K. Amthor]

If you want to change to other RM version, there is no need to change anything. Newer material has also RMSS stats but they are quite close to each other - in RMSS stat blocks for NPCs there are more skills mentioned and some skills are in RMSS range but that is about it. Even most melee OB's and DB's are the same (while they shouldn't).

If you compare RM2 Creatrures & Treasures (1&2) monsters to RMSS Creatures & Monster you'll notice the same difference - practically nothing: only spell lists, power points and some rare critical charts differ. Hits, OB's, DB's, size.. are the same. One would think that they recalculated monsters but - no they didn't. I was actually very displeased about this in 90's... However now I find it easy - I can pick what ever book  and it doesn't matter.   

FWIW - I have run SW with  both RM2 and RMSS so I might be too familiar to both the systems and setting to give answer that helps you. 

Tommi, if you think the RMSS conversions are not accurate, you should please speak up. Nicholas has someone else doing the conversions, and I know zilch about RMSS (you can take my RM2 when you pry it from my cold, undead hands...), so I don't know if they are doing a good job or not.

[Tommi]

Accurate?

Philosophical approach (=my view): Numbers should tell the same tale as text  (now they in some cases don't).  When a monster or a NPC is made from concept to numbers one should use use the system to describe it from that systems viewpoint... If one makes top 1% fighter in a world then one should be sure that it is WAY better than average NPC from system charts. Systems normal limits should not be needed to broken but it should be used efficiently.  Of course one may want to make a lesser fighter who has meaning in storyline - then it should be atleast  weaker than NPC tables example by some margin... 
 
 example 1: In RMSS 20th fighter in rulebook has OB of 140 (no items or backgrounds included) while I can build 5th lvl fighter without sweat to have  OB of 140  (I've  tried some cases and got 6th lvl fighter to about 200, 1st lvl to 150 - items included). So if one makes NPC that is considered to be good in medium/high level (10-15 lvl) bad ass category its numbers should in RMSS be very near the 20th lvl examples numbers.  Otherwise there could be just reference to the NPC table.

example 2: In RM2 char law 20th lvl fighter has OB of 190 (IIRC or was that SM2 armsman)   (backtracking: 60 lvl bon, 20 stat bon (assumed 90 temps in relevant stats, suitable race) 85 from skill ranks (40 ranks ) =165, then add one minor background option: +10 primary weapon and +15 weapon =190).
 In RM2 where lvl bonus has really big impact 130 is about minimum to the  good medium/high level fighter (70 ranks, 30 lvl bonus, 30 from  stats, items, specials = spec training or spec style or spec bonus) but 150 is really not too big.

While my examples indicate that at around lvl 10 NPC should be about equal between RMSS and RM2 they should not be in high levels 15+. This varies between professions.

To me it looks that while making dual stats they have just targeted to RM2 numbers. That is lazy.

While being your huge fan I'll  renew my comment from a few years ago: in same cases there is growing deviation between story and the numbers. two examples: all messangers (ironwind and Jaiman versions  compared to new material). The messanger should be almost as good fighter as 10th lvl PC fighter and absolutely better than what char law table gives. Now Arenreth monks are really bad including the Emer III 25 lvl monk (ian shiins bodygurad) OB 110 and DB 90 (again same numbers for both systems). In RMSS NPC table lvl 10 warrior monk has about those numbers. According to material those Arenreth monks should be able to hold their own against chargamai and e.g. in Jaiman master chargamai Thom (Jaiman Nomikos) at lvl 30 has OB170.

Being nuclear physicist I immediately notice numbers - is it curse or blessing? If you need someone looking into numbers...

[markc]

Is there not a saying that goes something like "Numbers never lie but are often misinterpreted."
 So yes IMHO numbers matter.
 

MDC