Topic: Old School RM, No DP RM

[Lord Garth]

Or you could have the player's actions determine which picks they get. Or ...

I really like the idea of player's actions determining their skill in something and developing their character's as they go. It would be an entirely different way of rewarding a player for their character's actions (eliminating the need for XP or DPs). The downside would be players would fail a lot more when trying to develop a skill. The upside, though, is they wouldn't have redundant skills (as providence13 inferred) as only skills they use would be developed.

With a little bit of inflation you could make things easier for players to develop as they go, the way they play. A potential solution could, for example be: Instead of rolling at -25 for not knowing a skill, baseline could be 0 plus their respective category stat bonus. Category stat bonus would replace skill stat bonus in an effort to simplify matters a wee bit. All lores would be RE/ME, all combat ST/ST/AG, all Magical In/Em ... That way when a player wants to attempt something completely new he instantly knows his "baseline" without having to consult the books. It's ZERO+BONUS (no level bonus since he's developed no ranks). A system such as this would however create zero ranks skill-bonus inflation, so to counter this I'd raise the 101 bar to something slightly higher.

Or something like that. This is just a Monday-morning idea. But I do like category stat bonuses replacing skill stat bonuses. Hmmmm, I'm going to give this a real look and see if I should go with this idea in my own games.

[Kristen Mork]

Or you could have the player's actions determine which picks they get. Or ...

I really like the idea of player's actions determining their skill in something and developing their character's as they go. It would be an entirely different way of rewarding a player for their character's actions (eliminating the need for XP or DPs). The downside would be players would fail a lot more when trying to develop a skill. The upside, though, is they wouldn't have redundant skills (as providence13 inferred) as only skills they use would be developed.

We still use DP, but the characters gain skills as they go.  For more details check out the recent Guild Companion editorial (http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2012/jun/wordsfromthewise160.html).  For the early levels, when a character uses a skill for the first time, I assume he has 1 rank in the skill and category (to be paid for next level).

[JimiSue]

I just wanted to echo some of the earlier posters. I like RM because it is complex and has realism. I dislike the whole idea of lumping skills together - for example in the real world an Olympic track cyclist won't make a good pole vaulter - because in the real world, skills are developed at a much more granular level than just a generic "athletics" skill. A weapon designer is unlikely to be a great structural designer (engineering), a concert french horn player couldn't pick up an electric guitar and play like Jimi Hendrix (perform)... and so on.

I would say that rather than try and force RM into doing something it was never designed to do, use a simpler system that's designed from the ground up to be simple. I recommend Savage Worlds - it works pretty well.

It will be interested to see what WotC do with 5th edition D&D, having managed to entirely alienate almost everyone who liked 3rd by taking the roleplaying element out of the game.. not that I'm suggesting that 3rd edition was ever not about combat, I think it works OK was a combat machine buyt falls down a bit outside of combat - which is why in my opinion 2nd was the best version of D&D yet written.

[markc]

Coming from a RM2 perspective, the first thing you'd need to do would be to consolidate the number of skills. If you add the core books and all the companions, including the arms companion which itself comes with a good 30 or so skills, there's somewhere around 200 or so skills (wild estimate). Whereas I've always loved options, some skills are redundant to the point of confusing though.

 I have a spreed sheet with a list of skills for both RM2 and RMSS/FRP, and believe it or not both have about the same number of skills. The total number can vary wildly as there are a lot of Crafts skills that can be listed.
MDC

[Lord Garth]

Coming from a RM2 perspective, the first thing you'd need to do would be to consolidate the number of skills. If you add the core books and all the companions, including the arms companion which itself comes with a good 30 or so skills, there's somewhere around 200 or so skills (wild estimate). Whereas I've always loved options, some skills are redundant to the point of confusing though.

 I have a spreed sheet with a list of skills for both RM2 and RMSS/FRP, and believe it or not both have about the same number of skills. The total number can vary wildly as there are a lot of Crafts skills that can be listed.
MDC

I'm not really familiar with RMSS to be honest, and I love the RM2 variety, but Flora Lore and Herbalism, for instance, could be consolidated into one single skill. /derail

[yammahoper]

And i think Herbalism and Flora Lore make sense.  One is a knowledge of healing plants, the ther of plants in an area, growing, harvesting, collecting seeds, etc.  IMO, Use4 and Prepare Herbs is redundant, since Herbalism should cover it. 

yet in someones game, they may have people who work preparing herbs but have no real idea how to find them or what they even do, sort of like an assembly job at a factory.  Insert tab Z into slot Q.  This is a very industrialized aproach, which makes sense, but rather turns me off.

Is it really so difficult to pick and ignore skills?  I prefer a large list of skills and toss out what I dont like.  Stun Removal is gone from my game, but Stun Mnv'ing remains(negates mnv penalty by 1 per rank in skill, no stat mods).  I think it's cool we can have this discussion over what skills are most vital, what are redundant or useless, etc.  Flexibility is the hall mark of RM.  The choices built should make creating the game you want easier.

At our game table there is a long running joke about the most efficacious skill: it's BATTLE AXE.  When faced with a situation that needs resolving, someone will typically blurt out "use your battle axe skill."  or just "battle axe."  The more absurd the use of violence would be ina  stiuation, the funnier the moment.  Kinda like ending every sentence..."in bed."

[GrumpyOldFart]

Whereas I've always loved options, some skills are redundant to the point of confusing though.

Sure. Since an RPG's actual mechanics are, when all is said and done, nothing but a complex math problem, I tend to put it in math terms: I don't need simple, but I want elegant. "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

As an example, if someone skilled with poisons wants to find something toxic growing wild in his local area, what skill covers that? When you can cover it off of Foraging/Survival, Herbalism, Poison Lore, Flora Lore, Region Lore (Local)... well obviously you don't need a specific "Find Poison" skill, you already have plenty of options. Often the lack is not whether there is a skill covering that, but a proper description of the relationship between skills. Rather than add a specific skill for Smelting Ore, say, describe the relationship between Mining and Metalworking well enough that the GM knows how much each applies to the task at hand.

[bennis1980]

Or you could have the player's actions determine which picks they get. Or ...

I really like the idea of player's actions determining their skill in something and developing their character's as they go. It would be an entirely different way of rewarding a player for their character's actions (eliminating the need for XP or DPs). The downside would be players would fail a lot more when trying to develop a skill. The upside, though, is they wouldn't have redundant skills (as providence13 inferred) as only skills they use would be developed.

We still use DP, but the characters gain skills as they go.  For more details check out the recent Guild Companion editorial (http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2012/jun/wordsfromthewise160.html).  For the early levels, when a character uses a skill for the first time, I assume he has 1 rank in the skill and category (to be paid for next level).

I was thinking about this all day in work and this is what I came up with. Characters apply any experience gained towards that particular skill. Any experience gained would also be totaled for levelling purpose. When the XP put towards a skill reaches a certain threshold, the skill is learned and a rank is gained. The threshold (for a particular skill) is:

T = (difference in XP between levels) x (skill cost) ÷ (DP per level)

E.g. If a character is level 6, has 80 DP per level and is using a skill costing 2DP

T = 20000 x 2 ÷ 80 = 500 XP

This would be recorded as the XP cost on the character sheet and after enough XP is applyed to the skill, a rank is gained.

It requires an extra sheet for recording current skills being learnt and doesn't go back to basics (apologies original poster) but makes for an interesting way of levelling and learning skills (if a little more demanding and dangerous)

[yammahoper]

or hand out dp instead of exp and the players place a check by skills used in play, allowing dp to spent there without training.  Any other skill not used in play would require training to advance.

Base training time is 8hrs  ranks one and two require 8hrs.  ranks three and four require 16 hours.  ranks five and six require 24 hours.  Again, normally only three hours in a day may be spent in training.  They may anly have time for two hours (such as when travelling and making camp), four hours if they have other responsibilities, etc.  It can take a week to get in eight hours training, or one day.  For higher ranks, it can take some time indeed.  Down time becomes imperative.

BTW, base traing time can be increased for truly dificult skills to master (learning a lost language) or decreased for simple skills/taught by a master/etc (cooking, Bruce Lee teaching martial arts).

RMSS rule book has the training table and additional info.

[Lord Garth]

At our game table there is a long running joke about the most efficacious skill: it's BATTLE AXE.  When faced with a situation that needs resolving, someone will typically blurt out "use your battle axe skill."  or just "battle axe."  The more absurd the use of violence would be ina  stiuation, the funnier the moment.  Kinda like ending every sentence..."in bed."

We use "Build a catapult" for all such situations or sometimes "Dig a tunnel". The tunnel one started when one player stated that his plan to get from the mainland to a 90kms away island was to dig a tunnel. When we pointed out that it was ninety-kilometers-away he simply replied that better get started soon then, no time to waste.

[bennis1980]

or hand out dp instead of exp and the players place a check by skills used in play, allowing dp to spent there without training.  Any other skill not used in play would require training to advance.

Although I think the original idea was to get away from using DP, it is a good idea. So I suppose you would hand out DPs as follows:

1DP = 10000 × { (current level + 1) ÷ 5 RND UP} ÷ (Max DP) XP

EG, 3rd level character with 80DP gets a DP every:

10000 × { (4) ÷ 5 RND} ÷ 80 = 10000 × 1 ÷ 80 = 125 XP

EG 2, 10th level character with 75DP gets a DP every:

10000 × {11÷5 RND} ÷ 75 = 10000 × 3 ÷ 75 = 400 XP


I like the idea of training , but I think players are tempted to abuse it. I tried it before and my group all agreed to stop for a few days to train. I had to use outside forces to move them along, something which they weren't happy about. I think one DP per level. earned training is more than generous.

[Lord Garth]

Awesome derail 

I digress on the need to make Rolemaster more math-y though. Sure, I don't find the system complicated, it is complex but that's a good thing, but, More complexity? If it really adds to my games, I'm all over it. Myself, I wouldn't put something as you are describing, bennis1980, in place.

On top of not really bringing anything new to the table IMO, some players already drag their feet when they have to update their character sheet once every 4-5 sessions. I don't cherish the prospect of players updating their character sheets on the fly during a gaming session.
 
And then there's of course the fact that skill costs vary depending on how many ranks you allot per level. Writing down WHEN you added that first rank in, say, Herbalism, would be important for calculating the DP cost for another rank if you were to keep with x/y costs.

/end derail

Back on topic, as has been stated, simplifying level advancement and skills is at odds with character personalization and diversity. A potential solution for players not keen on developing their PCs and more intent on faster character generation could be the use of templates. You'd end up with way less diverse PCs though.