Topic: I Can't Help Myself It's A New Edition

[David Johansen]

I've moved this rant from the "I Have A Dream" thread because it was out of place on a thread comprised of epigrams and decapitations...

I'd like to see a new edition, not so sure consolidation's the way to go.  Equal?  Nope, not when you put them on a scale.

There are things I think need to be done better than they are done in RMSS.  But many of them aren't done at all in RM2 or are done significantly worse.  I don't see any sense in settling for less.

We're talking about a game with double digit addition and charts as a core mechanic.  That's why HARP will never be a roaring success, there's a dozen games of its complexity level that don't expect the players to add double digit numbers and check a chart.  It is never going to compete with Savage Worlds or Risus in the rules lite department.

What Rolemaster don't need is the game that tries to make everyone happy.  Trying to have two methods of stat bonuses in the core book to make RMSS and RM2 fans happy will make the game more confusing and scary.  The core game needs to be unified in its methods.  Too many options will prevent growth by scaring off casual investigators.  (see case study Traveller the New Era)

Rolemaster's fractured fan base is hurting it in the market place and it hurts ICE because they cut their sales for any product released for any of three different systems.

Any unification will also lose customers but if it's done right it will retain more people who look into it out of curiousity.

I've had a partly finished re-write on my hard drive for a while now.  Maybe I should put it out there for people to pick apart.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I have stated in the past that I am in favor of doing a new edition, one that consolidates both systems by including a tiered skill system that allows for simple conversion between few skills and lots of skills (though unlikely as many skills as are currently in RMFRP).

However, before we can do such a revision, ICE needs to recapture the large portion of the fan-base that the old ICE lost when it moved from RM2 to RMSS. And that is where RMC comes in. It is meant to recapture that lost fan-base.

Once we do, then we can look forward to doing a major revision/consolidation.

[kasalin]

However, before we can do such a revision, ICE needs to recapture the large portion of the fan-base that the old ICE lost when it moved from RM2 to RMSS. And that is where RMC comes in. It is meant to recapture that lost fan-base.

Once we do, then we can look forward to doing a major revision/consolidation.

Just curious.

How do you know you're recapturing the lost fan-base?

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Just curious.

How do you know you're recapturing the lost fan-base?

Sales is a primary indicator. Both online and through/to distributors.

[RandalThor]

Well, I for one was not "lost" through the transfer from RM2 to RMSS. A new edition would be just fine by me though, as I am always looking for new ideas in the game department. I will say that these new ideas I am always looking for are more flavor than rules, though. Yes, I know that a rulebooks make more money because they are something that most of the players of a game will tend to buy, while campaign settings and adventures are more limited in their distribution, but I cannot help that - I prefer to get books with excellent maps and descriptions of great places, bunches of NPCs, and adventure plots. Just what I like. (This is the reason that I had a subscription to Pathfinder and Dungeon magazine before that, the quality of the maps and art was just too good to pass up.)

[jasonbrisbane]

What RandalThor said.

I've always been a huge RM fan whatever the game.
I've played the OLD ICE RM (with all companions at various stages), and our group played RMSS too and liked that.

The fact was that my old group drifted apart (different people went for jobs in different parts of the country) and so the group broke apart. Years later some of us are back and I have a different group.

Actually David, I liked RM for exactly the reasons you stated that people didn't like it!
I like the double digit system and adding together these numbers. I like the charts and I like the multiple stat generation systems.

I suppose it is just different strokes for different folks.

[Arioch]

I've had a partly finished re-write on my hard drive for a while now.  Maybe I should put it out there for people to pick apart.

Yes, I think that would be a great idea! I'm very curious! 

[Dax]

I was never lost as a fan.
But my group doesn't want to play and I avoided my game store out of frutstration.

As RMSS was released I don't recognized it as a new edition
(I bought the Arms Law because of the new breakage rules).
For all the shiny companions I thought I could always buy them when needed. :'(

Now I bought RMC and HARP (because of the spell system) and will go on.

[Fornitus]

Our group has been using Rm for 15 - 20 years (1 player 20 yrs) and when RMSS came out we got it and looked at it and said  "but thats why we quit playing D+D!"

Perhaps that was an unjust reaction, but we just ignored it and kept on with RM 2 and Comps.

I got all hyped about RMC Spell Law and ordered a pdf then ran to Kinkos in the middle of the night and got it printed before our next session. Wasn't quite what I had thought, now, if I had read these boards at the time I would have understood what RMC is intended to be.

RMC Spell Law has some good clairifications on stuff we argued about for years, so definitly worth buying. The other RMC books, however, will probaly just be ordered as funds arise to compleate our understanding of the writers intentions.

Anyway, thanks guys for getting ICE "back on track".

[David Johansen]

What RandalThor said.

Actually David, I liked RM for exactly the reasons you stated that people didn't like it!
I like the double digit system and adding together these numbers. I like the charts and I like the multiple stat generation systems.

You misunderstand me.  I think Rolemaster appeals to people who like double digit addition.  The problem is that those aren't the people who are looking for a simpler system.

Here's where I see the immovable object in the RM2 and RMSS fan base.

RMSS appeals to people who like a strongly structured system that does a good job of managing an amazing level of detail.

RM2 appeals to people who like a flexible, modular game and are unconcerned with balance, power creep, and nit picky details.

I'm not sure you can have a structured freeform game...

[Hawkwind]

I used to play RM2 many, many years ago, but the group I played in drifted apart. When HARP came out I picked it up and started one of the groups I play with on it. We played HARP for about 18 months before they decided they wanted to return to D&D. The other HARP campaign I run is still going, and isn't likely to end anytime soon.

I bought the RMC books when they came out, and I have considered trying to swap my HARP campaign to RMC (several of the players are old RM2 fans), but will most likely stick with HARP for the forseeable future.

RMSS came out when I wasn't playing any RM games, so I never picked it up, and I'm not likely to at this stage. And I'm not very likely to pick up a new edition of RM. But I would certainly pick up any supplements and adventures if the new system was easily convertible to RM2/RMC.

The group that swapped back to D&D - I think the complexity was a key issue, combined with the release of 3.5. For the group currently playing HARP, the complexity and the double-digit addition isn't a problem (they're all quite capable of using calculators  ).

Hawk

[David Johansen]

Here's a link to some of my notes.  They weren't in a particularly organized state and I have no less than three complete revision projects to pick from as it turns out, but what you see here is pretty much where I'd go with it.  There's some things to iron out and I'd probably go back to the old racial stat bonus method to make the chart leaner but here you go:

http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/Revised.pdf

[markc]

 I think that by the time a new version gets done the RPG market will be vastly different than it is now in many ways.

MDC 

[Arioch]

Here's a link to some of my notes.  They weren't in a particularly organized state and I have no less than three complete revision projects to pick from as it turns out, but what you see here is pretty much where I'd go with it.  There's some things to iron out and I'd probably go back to the old racial stat bonus method to make the chart leaner but here you go:

http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/Revised.pdf

Thank you very much! Very interesting! 

[skathros!]

You misunderstand me.  I think Rolemaster appeals to people who like double digit addition.  The problem is that those aren't the people who are looking for a simpler system.

Hmmm, i'm not too sure about this.

I got into RM (or RMish rules) when 1E merp came out. It was nice, compact, and no more complex than AD&D was. My next exposure to RM was with RMSS. Although a game loved by many, the added complexity made it "not for us". With RMFRP, I got my hopes up but after purchasing it, found out it was pretty much the same in terms of complexity level (just better organized and prettier). So, we simply wrote off RM as a game which would ever find its way to our gaming table and that was that...for a while.

We (by we, I mean my gaming group and I) knew a lite RM could be done (it had been done quite successfully already) but knew ICE decided to pursue a different route. Then we started hearing a buzz about HARP. Although it simplified a lot of rules, and was an excellent game, it simply felt like a different game to us. Once again, no ICE products at our gaming table.

Then, a while back, I started hearing some talk over at DF of a Rolemaster Classic line being launched. After some tentative research on it (RM2 having passed our group by), and a boat-load of "is it simpler than RMSS/FRP" questions on various boards, I took the plunge and haven't looked back since. The coming of RMX simply rounded off my perfect RM.

"What the heck is the point of all of this, Skath?"

I'm glad you asked.

Although RMSS/FRP might appeal to "people who like double digit addition", this was, for a long time, the only version of RM we had. There was no way of knowing if a lighter RM ruleset would be well received. RMC is not only a great way to scoop up some of the old RM2 folks, but it'll hopefully bring in a different set of the RPG community (and, I believe, a larger set); Mr. Joe Gamer who prefers medium level crunch. Hey, it worked with me

Having all of these choices is great. ICE can showcase the RM rule across multiple complexity levels from the simplistic into-level RMX to the more robust RMFRP. This is great...for now. Everyone knows that sooner or later it'll need to be consolidated into a new RM.

Hopefully, when a new RM comes out, I'd like to see a modular RM. A set of basic RM rules (like a crunchier RMX) that can be used alone for sustainable game play, to which could be added other ICE products to up the crunch for those that "aren't the people who are looking for a simpler system".

[Arioch]

Hopefully, when a new RM comes out, I'd like to see a modular RM. A set of basic RM rules (like a crunchier RMX) that can be used alone for sustainable game play, to which could be added other ICE products to up the crunch for those that "aren't the people who are looking for a simpler system".

I think that this is what Rasyr meant with "tiered skill system", when talking of the revision about the revision on the other thread:

Once we have recaptured that lost fan-base, or as much of it as possible, then ICE can turn its thoughts towards a new revision, one that does try to unify both RMC and RMFRP fan-bases. One of the only ways to accomplish this is going to be through a tiered skill system (example: Tier 1 == 30 skills, 35 DPs/lvl; Teir 2 == 60 skills, 70 DPs/lvl; Tier 3 == 120 skills, 140 DPs/lvl -- or something to this effect).

I'm right?

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Pretty much, yes, that is what I meant.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

Having now got a complete set of the RM2, RMSS and Harp rules I'd have to say that none are exactly "rules-lite". Rolemaster and Harp by a normal* gamers definition "Rules Heavy". And so they should be, that's exactly what attracted the fan base. I'd say we don't want simplification to extremes... lose the charts and you would lose me.

What has been the problem is the lack of definition and direction within the development of the system itself.

RMSS introduced the catagory/skill subdivision which is realistic... however it wasn't across the board, there were still "Combined" skill development in certain categories, which for me was just wimping out. The case remains for PP and Body Development being Race dependant... but make them the ONLY exceptions.

I'd like to see the same set of rules applicable to all genres for example, THAT would simplify things.

* the normal gamer being an outsider who hasn't played the system and just heard about it.

[Skynet]

I'd like to see the same set of rules applicable to all genres for example, THAT would simplify things.

Now would be my dream come true. Rolemaster is flexible enough to do anything. Of course, there would have to be some modifications and/or subsystems to handle something like superheroes, but it could do it. Easily. In fact, Rolemaster already did some of the work with Black Ops, Pulp adventures and Spacemaster.

I would kill for a generic revision of Rolemaster, with :
- a "universal" approach,
- broad professions,
- very complete skill list that could be cut down to what is important for a particular genre or type of play,
- more generic powers able to handle magic AND psychic (base on the psychic powers of Spacemaster, not the spell lists), etc.
- borad but logical armor tables (you know, where wearing a leather armor IS actually better than wearing nothing...),
- same thing for weapons,
- revised yet simple rules for vehicles where a bicycle doesn't break when you sneeze on it,
- etc.

And I would do it the same way they did Privateer and RMFRP, that is ONE (1) rulebook with basic but totally usable and self-contained rules for everything, and supplements for details about genres or advanced, compatible yet optional, rules. But all under the SAME set of rules, mixable, compatible, exploitable. 

There, you have it. This was my dream. I am totally aware that it is almost impossible for now to expect something like this from ICE, but still, dreams are... well... dreams. Also, I'm not sure about this, but I think it would be easier for ICE to get out of the eternal RM2 vs RMSS duality, giving less attention to Spacemaster, etc. One set of rules to rule them all, and in profits bind them!

Ok, have to go to work, but dream on people!

[dutch206]

RMSS is a lot like the black-cover MERP rules in style and feeling.  It's very hard for me to look at those rules and not think about middle earth.  RM Classic doesn't suffer from a 'lack of focus', IMHO.  That's because it has always been a library of optional rules you can use to make a campaign to your specifications.

As for the tiered skill system being introduced in RMFRP, I believe it was actually introduced in RM Companion VI.