Topic: New RMFRP GM and Campaign - Question 1

[watchmanbn]

It's obvious from the forum that there are lots of players and GM's experienced with both RMSS/FRP and other systems. As I plan to run RM for the first time, I'm hoping to tap into your collective wisdom and experience.

Over the next two months as I prepare my new campaign, I anticipate coming back here to post additional questions about house rules and resources.

My first question is probably a bit out of left field: How many of you have used the Character Generation system described for the "Majestic Campaign"? (see here:  http://stobie.home.sprynet.com/games/RM/MM-chargen.htm )  And, what are your thoughts about it, whether you've used it or not. I'm especially interested in thoughts about its complexity and any balance issues you foresee.

In short, I'm considering a modified version of that system, giving all players 450000 generation points (gpu) . They can spend this on:

• Stats, at a cost of 500 gpu/pt (using the RMFRP point buy costs);   minimum of 660 stats, max of 800
• Experience over the starting 10,000, at a cost of 2 gpu/xp,    minimum of 1st level max of 3rd lvl
• Development points, at a cost of 500 gpu/pt;    minimum of 0 , max of 200 dp
• Talent points, at a cost of 2000 gpu/pt (using the Character Law point buy system);    min of 0 talents, max of 80 points
• Background Options are not used

Why I'm considering it:
1) My players are used to and comfortable with a point buy system and generally uncomfortable with random rolls for chargen.
2) Assuming roughly equal levels of familiarity with the system (i.e. none) and skill/interest in optimizing, it should lead to varied, but roughly equal characters.
3) It seems to be generally accepted that 660pt/1st level characters are too boring and too delicate for the average player. Lots of folks start their campaigns at lvl 3, for instance.
4) I really want some way to make up for what I perceive as an imbalance in the races. (I'm using the full list of races as found on the Dale .xls character sheet.)

So, please help a newbie out when your thoughts and feedback. My thanks in advance!

[runequester]

A few points I'll bring up:

There's very few random rolls involved in RMFRP character creation, so I wouldn't let that deter you. The only things that spring to mind is potential stats and stat increases, and I am sure there's non-random options involved there.

The real issue I see is if nobody is familiar with the game, they'll run a real risk of being overwhelmed. I see this a lot in GURPS. Give a newbie the book and he won't know what to do.
For a game where everything is as interconnected, and full of choices like Rolemaster, I don't think it'd be a good idea.

The "normal" process takes you pretty much step by step, ending up with a finished character.


If you want to amp up the characters a bit, raise the DP a little, or give everyone a free training package based on concept, and let them buy a second one normally.


I would tread /very/ carefully with this, especially for a first game. Rolemaster tends to be a game where players don't "get it" until they've played the game, and if the first game ends up with broken characters, they'll be very unlikely to want to go through it again.


Just a few words of caution
Good luck in whichever way you go

[yammahoper]

Seems complicated.

If a bit of extra umph is desired, start everyone at level 3, give set dev points per level (I give 100) and hand out a free lifestyle and vocation TP, tied to their background and your approval, of course.

Level 3 is the typical level a standard RM adult would be after a few years experience in life, so unless they start as very young kids, it is an appropriate starting level.

Set dev points allows players to tailor stats after conception and sets a level of parity in character design.  It is also easier to equate exp to dev points by dividing 100 into the exp needed to reach each level, thus revealing how much exp is needed for each dev point and alowing for traing between and at level gain.  This can be really important when the mage needs to learn a language and has a spell allowing 2ranks learned for everyone bought but cant sit around until he levels to learn it. 

Begining TP should be a natural development in a PC's adolescence imo.  Their is one problem with this, if you vare at all (I don't): the TP's are not balanced against each other. 

If you stick with the point buy thingamicjig, I hope ya let us know how it worked out.

[runequester]

This is true as well. Rolemaster assumes that level 1 is very much "17 year old apprentice".

I like the idea of a lifestyle and a vocational TP btw. Just make sure they are something interesting and you're good to go.

[watchmanbn]

Thanks much for the quick replies. Valid points all.

I agree the complexity seems high. For background: my group is experienced gamers, having played "crunchy" systems like GURPS and Hero, Moderate systems like Mutants and Masterminds and 3.5 D&D Gestalt, and enough "system light" games to know we don't like them much. So, their 'too complex' line is probably north of most other groups.

But, according to you RM veterans the (early) consensus seems to be to keep the core FRP char gen process.

My worry about "start at level 3" is that it doesn't get me away from the complexity very much, because in addition to the char gen process, you've got to go through two 'leveling up' processes. And, if the player has a bad basic design, he'll be 2 extra levels down that road. And, we'll have to design characters face-to-face because of the stat gain rolls.

As for 'randomness', it's in the aforementioned stat gains, as well as in the flaws & talents, most other Background Options, as well as the rolls for extra items in the TP's. Granted, I could the "choose" options for most of those, but the number of BOs varies by race according to a logic I haven't yet fathomed. If I go that route, I might just say "6 Background Options for everyone!"

[yammahoper]

I allow mixed men almost exclusively.  You have no desire to read my anti elves rant, and the "short" races: please.  They are rediculous.

I give 10 stat mod ponts to sread out as the players choose amongst their stats.  Any stat mod over +2 accrues a -1 mod.  No stats can have positive and negatives applied to it (i.e. no cancelling out).

In modern/sci-fi games I run neo humans, which get +10 stat mod points, and can gain up to 10 more for a -1 penalty mod per point.

I use 55 Talent Points.  Character Law has an excellent point buy talent system in it.  There are also wealth tables and the like that can be rolled on, but everything also has a set Talent Point price.

[runequester]

Thanks much for the quick replies. Valid points all.

I agree the complexity seems high. For background: my group is experienced gamers, having played "crunchy" systems like GURPS and Hero, Moderate systems like Mutants and Masterminds and 3.5 D&D Gestalt, and enough "system light" games to know we don't like them much. So, their 'too complex' line is probably north of most other groups.

We lean towards heavier games (Rolemaster, GURPS, Burning Wheel) too. WFRP 1st edition and Runequest are about as light as I tend to like to go.

The problem is.. like GURPS.. that its very possible to "screw up" something in character creation. This is easy to avoid once you understand how it all works.

My worry about "start at level 3" is that it doesn't get me away from the complexity very much, because in addition to the char gen process, you've got to go through two 'leveling up' processes. And, if the player has a bad basic design, he'll be 2 extra levels down that road. And, we'll have to design characters face-to-face because of the stat gain rolls.

This is very true. You could beef up level 1 a bit more instead.
For stat gain rolls, maybe there's some sort of "use the average roll" idea that could be used?

As for 'randomness', it's in the aforementioned stat gains, as well as in the flaws & talents, most other Background Options, as well as the rolls for extra items in the TP's. Granted, I could the "choose" options for most of those, but the number of BOs varies by race according to a logic I haven't yet fathomed. If I go that route, I might just say "6 Background Options for everyone!"

I prefer more of a "sword n sorcery" or "historical fantasy" feel, so I use humans almost exclusively really.
I believe one of the books (gamemaster law? Character law?) breaks the races down by talent points, and that might work better (more like GURPS)

[Zat]

As a GM and a player, I actually like starting at level 1, not just in RM but in any game I play. I don't know what it is exactly, but I tend to get much more attached to my own characters and those of my players (when GMing) when beginning a long standing campaign at level 1.
I don't necessarily feel as if I am cheating however I do feel that I am gaining something I have not yet earned.

There is also the fact that playing and GMing at low levels is a hell of a lot of fun. I actually prefer the low-mid levels to the high levels, as a GM. It's all in the skill to be able to create scenarios to fit the needs of your players and their characters. Storytelling, details and interaction seem much more important at lower levels, travelling without the aid of various teleporting or flying spells is a real link into other adventures and a challenge to the players, healing is problematic and the characters can't take/deal much punishment, so they do have to be careful of charging head-long into situations, therefore  spending more time investigating and interacting with your adventures.

My advice, start them at level 1, don't 'buff' them, but if they do need help make sure you have something they could fall back on if required, i.e., a friendly Cleric in the local village or access to cheap herbs or one shot items such as rune papers or potions.

Enjoy level 1. I do. 

[markc]

  The best advice might be to have you the GM make some PC's and let the players just play them a while. Then you and they can see what skills are appropriate for the game.
  One thing I have found that helps out is I do a 1 on 1 PC gen and work the PC into my story. I ask background Q's and use that as a guide on what I allow a player to buy skill and talent wise. IE it has to make sense no just I want to buy this....because. I also have some restrictions on what you can and cannot by based on culture. Unfortunately it is all in my head so I cannot give you anything  as a guideline.
 Another is to tell the players what skill bonus they will need to accomplish a specific task without failure, IE if you need 111 an easy task gets +60 IIC, 111-60=51 and subtract the fumble range of 1-5, 51-5(max #)= 46. So if you have a 46 you have the best chance to succeed on a easy task. Once players know this they know what skill bonuses they will need to do tasks and that helps a lot of what the number of Ranks you need for your PC.


MDC

[watchmanbn]

Ok, well, you've all talked me out of the proposed system. The mathematical analysis I did was useful to me in comparing the relative worth of stats vs. resistance vs. DP's, and comparing the races, so it's not all wasted time.

yammahoper said

I use 55 Talent Points.  Character Law has an excellent point buy talent system in it.  There are also wealth tables and the like that can be rolled on, but everything also has a set Talent Point price.

A rockstar. is you.

Yeah, this is my fallback position, and I'll probably just "band" the races. Something like:
+5 TP if your total racial stat adjustments are negative.
+5 TP if your resistance bonuses total less than 50
+5 TP if instead of racial benefits like +21 End, Nightvision, or "can't be scared", your race gets "always barefoot" or "+20 rope mastery"

Still thinking that one through.

 
 Another is to tell the players what skill bonus they will need to accomplish a specific task without failure, IE if you need 111 an easy task gets +60 IIC, 111-60=51 and subtract the fumble range of 1-5, 51-5(max #)= 46.

Good stuff. Copied into my system FAQ doc for the players. I regret to inform you that I'll treat this as my own invention though, or with a generic Hat Tip to the forums.    You and I will always know the truth though...

As for the various comments about 'Limiting races to humans': I admit that would solve my racial imbalance issue, but in a nose-spite-face kind of way. It'll be a High Fantasy world, probably drawing from Shadow World sources a bit.

Finally, Amethyst Rage: Thanks for the reminder about herbs and healing. I will plan an NPC healer sort if none of the players ponies up for that role. Usually someone does, but the RM Healer =/= 3.5 Cleric in fluff or play-style.

[markc]

  I will not cry if you say provided my markc from the ICE Forums but it is up to you. No sweat either way.
MDC

[Deepfire]

Maybe you should use some pregenerated characters for a small scenario, so the players can get a grip of the system and build their "real" characters better - or stick to the first ones

[markc]

  One thing I often do is allow a player to recreate a PC once in the first 3 months of gaming or about 6 sessions. Now I record everything that happens for PC gen so I can go back and have them use the same rolls and back out stat gains from TP if required. But if you do not keep good records then IMHO it is an advantage to be able to do this. Especially if you have a PC that rolled poorly for various things. I have thought of not giving any rolls on TP's but I have not do so yet.
MDC

[GrumpyOldFart]

If someone's just a min/maxing power gamer I'll usually let him learn it the hard way. But if someone is trying to express a character concept and doesn't yet have a handle on how, I'm inclined to cut them some slack and let them redefine what's on the character sheet once they're more familiar with how the game mechanics expresses such things.

In the same way I tend to let my experienced players take their lumps if they screw something up in chargen, unless they were basically trying to create a new character archetype ("sort of a cross between a druid and a bard... but doesn't get his spells from worship, draws the power from the earth..." yes, I've actually, personally gotten that one) in which case I'm generally willing to let them explore, and we'll tweak the mechanics as needed to account for it.

[Cory Magel]

Maybe you should use some pregenerated characters for a small scenario, so the players can get a grip of the system and build their "real" characters better - or stick to the first ones

When our group first started using the RM system we all got together, generated some characters based on what we thought we would create for the campaign, and just ran through three or four combats.  While we were already a very experienced group at that time (maybe 10 years gaming or so) and we were intentionally looking for a more detailed/complex system it helped us realize certain things about the system.  The importance of defense, how criticals and hits impacted you (heh, no pun intended) in terms of stuns/penalties/bleed/etc, that things like Skeletons are immune to much of the critical results, that unlike D&D trolls aren't just annoying... they're downright deadly, and so on.  It also showed us some of the things we didn't think were needed.  We tossed exhaustion points out the window from the get-go (you'll find a lot of RM GM's don't use them).

If you do this I'd suggest running combats with the following...
1. Wild Animals: Bears, Cats, that kind of thing.
2. Human/Humanoid types.
3. Undead types.
4. Orcs/Trolls

Now, yes, you're going to have to level those characters up for the various power level of the fights, but it's been almost 20 years since then and I still think that was one of the most useful things we did.  It shows you how combat works, it teaches you how to level up to some degree, and it shows you the various degrees of power between foes that may not be obvious to the novice RM user.  It can be a lot of fun too, not having to worry about the fact that you might get killed in the testing since you are, after all, just testing.

If you want to really scare them throw them against a dragon in the last fight and see how many rounds the groups lasts with you (the GM) doing your best to use all the dragons abilities to their full impact (FYI: With a group of about six 8-11th level or so PC's the dragon incapacitated or killed them all within three rounds).

[pastaav]

I think starting them at level 3 is good choice....but don't let them roll for repeated stat gains and just assign them the expected average increase. The repeated rolling for stat increases is repetetive and teach nothing useful about the game.

Going by Cory Magel's suggestion you can save yourself some work by using stats from the NPC-table and do the test battles. Leveling up characters just to do mock combats is probably not worth it IMHO.

[providence13]

Linear stat gains sure helped us. No one liked the yo-yoing of stats. Since it stops at about 3rd level, we just start at 3rd.
We allow TP, multiple of the same are ok but you still have the TP Rank cap.
100 DP/lvl.
Get a program to assist with CharGen. That will help with leveling characters.

There's nothing wrong with starting at 1st lvl. As long as they know that's equal to about 1/3 lvl in other games.