Official ICE Forums
Systems & Settings => Rolemaster => RMC/RM2 => Topic started by: Carnus on February 20, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
-
Hi
I just got my RMC books and was testing out character creation with my wife and had a few questions come up.
I played a little RM2 years back and remember that casters used to start with a set ammount of spell lists.
So far in RMC I cant seem to find that. So in RMC do characters just spend development points to attempt to learn a list at character creation? and if thats the case does that mean that a 1st level character who spent most if not all their points on lists could learn 4 lists max (2 in adolesenance if they spent 20 ranks on one and rolled well on the other and another two in apprenticeship if they did the same)?
Also are 1st level chaacters in RMC playable? I remember that RM2 would recommend that characters start at 5th?
Thanks
-
It is actually covered much better in Spell Law....
But the basics is....
For each rank purchased in a list, you get a +5. You then roll, and if the total is over 100, you learn the portion of the list you were trying to learn.
If you put 20 ranks in a list, then you basically don't need to roll, and can learn a second lists.
Off the top of my head, I think 2 is the max you can learn per level. (and yes, that means learning 2 lists during adol. and two at apprenticeship).
Now, RMC Spell Law includes some different options, for example, one option is the option used in RMX. Spell List Aquisition costs for Pure and Hybrids are doubled (to 2/* -- Semis and Non costs remain the same) and characters purchase each rank in the list that they want to learn (i.e. buy 5 ranks, and you know the list to fifth level). Using this option, the character may purchase spells from up to 5 lists per level (IIRC, they can llearn more than that, but at higher costs -- in the RMC Spell Law option, not the RMX variant, which used just the basics of the option).
If you use some of the options from RMX, yes, first level characters can be very playable.
The two main options being
1) Base PP from RMC Spell Law, this gives a 1st level character approximately 10 extra PP to start off with.
2) Alternate Body Dev -- This RMX option starts a character off with 20% of their racial max on hit points, and then each rank adds 1/2 of the hit die type plus 1 (i.e. a hit die of d10 gives +6 hits per rank), and Con stat bonus is a straight add to hits (and the Con Bonus can put hits over the racial max, but hits from ranks cannot).
-
If you put 20 ranks in a list, then you basically don't need to roll, and can learn a second lists.
Off the top of my head, I think 2 is the max you can learn per level. (and yes, that means learning 2 lists during adol. and two at apprenticeship).
1 - Actually possibly less than 20 ranks, because your primary magic stat also got figured in to the bonus, and since you have to have at least a +10 from your temporary, that probably canceled 2 ranks.
2 - To my recollection, no, you are restricted to studying one list at a time. I suppose if you had the DP to perfect a list and then some all in one lvl, the GM would say you were studying only 1 list at a time but still allow 2 to be gained upon leveling.
The individual spell development sure does make that easier, and more rewarding to the players. I'm running with that option for the first time.
-
1 Actually adding Realm Stat Bonus to a Spell List develment rolls is an option, not a core rule.
2 according to the rules you can place development points in two list pr lvl, but ONLY if you reach 100% in the first list. So if you place as adolescent place 20 ranks in 1 list, you are allowed to place ranks in another list, you just dont gain a spell gain roll for it until level 1. So basically you are only allow to gain one list pr level.
-
1 - Actually possibly less than 20 ranks, because your primary magic stat also got figured in to the bonus, and since you have to have at least a +10 from your temporary, that probably canceled 2 ranks.
As Pixel01 points out, that is an option, not part of the core rules.
2 - To my recollection, no, you are restricted to studying one list at a time. I suppose if you had the DP to perfect a list and then some all in one lvl, the GM would say you were studying only 1 list at a time but still allow 2 to be gained upon leveling.
2 according to the rules you can place development points in two list pr lvl, but ONLY if you reach 100% in the first list. So if you place as adolescent place 20 ranks in 1 list, you are allowed to place ranks in another list, you just dont gain a spell gain roll for it until level 1. So basically you are only allow to gain one list pr level.
Not quite accurate - the following is what the core rules are/mean.
Core Rules
- You may only learn one portion of a list at a time.
- If your first attempt in a given level is successful, you may attempt to learn a second spell list portion (on a different list, or a higher portion of the list just learned). The core rules do not put any limitations on the number of ranks that must be purchased to allow this.
- If your first attempt in a given level is unsuccessful, you may attempt to learn a second (different) spell list portion (on a different list than the first, but doing so loses the ranks in the first spell list portion attempted.
- If you first attempt is unsuccessful, you may purchase more ranks in the same portion, but only if you can bring your total up to 20 ranks, which means you may learn the list automatically.
- If you purchase 20 ranks in a list, you automatically learn that portion of the spell list (no roll required), and may start purchasing ranks on a second list portion.
- Although it is not explicitly and clearly stated in the rule, a character may only purchase ranks in 2 different list portions per level. The core rules do say that only one list may be learned, and then it says that there is an exception. However, the way that the exceptions are worded, the character is allowed to attempt to learn a second list portion regardless of the outcome of the attempt to learn the first list portion.
- Each block of development points is considered a separate "level" for the purpose of learning spell lists. Just as each block of development points also counts separately for how many ranks may be purchased in a given skill. This means that Adolescent and Apprenticeship are fully considered to be separate levels for the learning of spell lists.
-
I think your 2nd bullet point is mistaken:
If your first attempt in a given level is successful, you may attempt to learn a second spell list portion (on a different list, or a higher portion of the list just learned). The core rules do not put any limitations on the number of ranks that must be purchased to allow this.
Page 83 of CL, Rt Col 1st para, or P20 SL, lt col, 1st bullet point, seem pretty clear that the only exception to the "One and only one list pick attempt per level" in core is to auto buy the list out with 20 ranks, then begin spending ranks on the next pick.
It's re-affirmed in CL Option 14, in the first paragraph after the bullet points, where it says that even when stat bonus is allowed, you still need to buy 20 ranks to auto buy the first pick to be allowed to attempt a second list portion.
Unless you're making an official change to the rules in your official voice?
-
I think your 2nd bullet point is mistaken:
If your first attempt in a given level is successful, you may attempt to learn a second spell list portion (on a different list, or a higher portion of the list just learned). The core rules do not put any limitations on the number of ranks that must be purchased to allow this.
That specific paragraph fully implies that a second list may be learned if the attempt to learn a first list is successful, nor does it specifically mention required number of ranks.
Page 83 of CL, Rt Col 1st para, or P20 SL, lt col, 1st bullet point, seem pretty clear that the only exception to the "One and only one list pick attempt per level" in core is to auto buy the list out with 20 ranks, then begin spending ranks on the next pick.
It's re-affirmed in CL Option 14, in the first paragraph after the bullet points, where it says that even when stat bonus is allowed, you still need to buy 20 ranks to auto buy the first pick to be allowed to attempt a second list portion.
Unless you're making an official change to the rules in your official voice?
No, I didn't make a mistake, nor was I making a change to the official rules, I was only making an official interpretation of the existing rules as printed.
I went by the material published in RMC Spell Law (pages 19 & 20) for what I said officially above. Paraphrasing what is written on those 2 pages in my statement in an effort to make it clearer. The information used to write that particular bullet point that you quoted is from page 19 of RMC Spell Law, where the last full paragraph on that page says:
Once they have "learned" a portion of that list (i.e. made a successful Spell Gain Roll), their skill ranks in that list drop to zero. Then they may begin to develop skill ranks in another list or new skill ranks for a higher-level portion of the same list.
This same paragraph can be found on page 83 of RMC Character Law, the second paragraph under the "Developing Skill Ranks for Spell Lists" header in the left hand column. The first paragraph in the right hand column is where it talks about purchasing 20 ranks, but it does not specify that it is the "exception" under which a second list may be learned. The exception could quite easily be construed as "successfully learning a list", and the paragraph that I mentioned earlier in this paragraph (and which is quoted above) comes right after the paragraph where the exception is mentioned (and it also says "see below for the one exception") while the 20 ranks paragraph is several paragraphs later (The same paragraph can be found directly above the one from Spell Law, page 19 as well).
Therefore, while it could conceivably be read/viewed either way, I read/interpreted it in the manner in which I posted. That is not "changing the rules", it is clarifying the existing rules because they are not fully clear and/or are perhaps even contradictory in some spots.
In further regards to page 83 of RMC Character Law. RMC Spell Law came out after RMC Character Law, and the rules in it (Spell Law), should and actually do have precedence over the same rules in RMC Character Law. Plus, when comparing the two sets of Spell List Acquisition rules, the RMC Character Law set can, and should, be considered to be an abbreviated version of the RMC Spell Law rules, especially since the top section of page 83 also refers the reader to Spell Law for more information and options.
Nor is it advisable to consider what is stated inside an option to be indicative of rules that are not explicitly stated. Plus, the way that the option is worded, it could be construed that that particular statement is made because the option makes it easier to learn spell lists -- which is acknowledged within that option's text.
In other words, it would not take a major stretch of the imagination for a GM to take the wording of the option to mean "that since the option makes it easier to learn spells, that a second list should not be allowed unless 20 ranks in the first list is purchased".
To recap....
The ruling made above is not a mistake or a change in the official rules. It is an official interpretation of the printed/existing rules made on the basis of the text involved and the nature of the original question, a clarification.
-
Once they have "learned" a portion of that list (i.e. made a successful Spell Gain Roll), their skill ranks in that list drop to zero. Then they may begin to develop skill ranks in another list or new skill ranks for a higher-level portion of the same list.
If you double check the context of this quoted text, I'm pretty sure what it means is:
Once you "Make" a list, the ranks spent in it drop to zero. . .this was to prevent any confusion with issues like having 10 ranks in SLA "Fire Law" learning pick 1-10, then the next level purchasing 10 ranks in SLA "Fire Law" learning pick 11-20, you only have 10 ranks, not 10+10 from last level 20. hence the whole "Drops to zero ranks" reference.
That's laid out pretty explicity on SL page 20-21
A Successful Roll: Once a successful Spell Gain Roll is made, the character is considered to have learned the use of the spells on the portion of the list that they were studying. They may then use those spells as long as such use complies with other rules for their use (power points, time requirements, etc.). The number of skill ranks in that list is reduced to zero. The character may develop more skill ranks for that list, but they apply to learning a higher-level portion of the list.
In overall context, there is an "Order of actions" in level gain.
1) Earn enough experience to go up a level.
2) Make checks for stat gain.
3) Calculate DP based on new temp development stats from step 2.
4) Spend DP on ranks of skills
5) If using core SLA, make your SLA rolls.
Once you reach step 5, you have already spent all of your DP in step 4, so you cannot go back and buy more ranks of SLA (or anything else).
There's a specific, given exception to the rules, that if you purchase 20 ranks in a list, you automatically learn it without a roll, and may then spend ranks in another list, which you may then roll SLA in an attempt to learn that second pick.
Once you're at the stage of rolling, you have passed over the stage of purchasing ranks, should have no DP left, and cannot "Go back" to buy more of anything.
The text on Pg 83 of CL seems pretty clear and concrete on the issue, stating only one list per level in core, and that there is only one exception, listed below. If there is only "one" exception, and it's laid out as 20 ranks (with the two methods of possibly getting 20 ranks laid out in detail) that seems to exclude any other method.
If you allowed a successful roll, then go back and buy more ranks and try again, someone could buy 5 ranks, hope to get lucky, buy 5 more ranks, hope to get lucky, go back and buy 5 more ranks, hope to get lucky. . . .thankfully you need to spend all your DP before making rolls, or a lucky pure caster with 40 DP might be able to learn 8 lists in a level that way.
When a character expends development points to acquire skill ranks, he may attempt to study one, and only one, list of spells by developing skill ranks for that list (see below for the only exception). Characters may not develop skill ranks for a variety of lists and count on the luck of the dice to give them spells. A character must develop only one list of spells at a time.
Once he has learned a portion of that list (i.e. made a successful Spell Gain Roll), his skill ranks in that list drop to zero. Then he may begin to develop skill ranks in another list or new skill ranks for a higherlevel portion of the same list.
...snip for brevity. . .
If a character is able to allocate development points for a total of 20 skill ranks with a list (insuring its gain), he learns the list immediately and may spend DP to develop skill ranks for a second spell list. He will ?learn? the appropriate portion of the first list and be entitled to make a Spell Gain Roll for the second.
If a character, after making an unsuccessful Spell Gain Roll, wishes to begin the study of another list, he may do so, but he forfeits all skill ranks developed for the first spell list. Such skill ranks may be neither transferred nor retained if the character wishes to switch his efforts to some other spell list. He may, if he has enough development points, allocate development points to bring the skill rank total with the first list to 20 and then begin to develop skill ranks for the second as described above.
I think the red portion, is referring fairly clearly to the green portion (and to the slight variant of the paragraph after the green portion). . .so you need to 20 rank the first list, thus learning it without a roll, to get a chance to roll on the second list. .
I guess SL over-riding CL makes sense, but P 19-20 in SL is a word for word cut-n-paste of 83 in CL, except the green para above and the one after it are laid out in bullet points. (Which, if anything, only stress the importance of those two points out of the rest of the text.)
-
Not the way I read it. As the last line in the second portion that you quoted
He may, if he has enough development points, allocate development points to bring the skill rank total with the first list to 20 and then begin to develop skill ranks for the second as described above.
specifically points out that if the character still has development points, he may buy more ranks. That in and of itself, is saying that those "5 steps" you listed are not accurate as this sentence implies that the spell gain roll is made immediately WHEN the ranks are purchased, not at the end of development, after all points have been spent.
I gave the official interpretation up above -- http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=6061.msg79780#msg79780 -- In making that Official Interpretation I reviewed and then made the interpretation from ALL of the text involved, not just bits and pieces.
Some of the text in Character Law and Spell Law IS contradictory, thus the need for the Official Interpretation to make it clearer and more easily understood.
-
The way I see it, the original author must have thought:
"OK, given the golden 'one-and-only-one spell list pick per level' rule, we seem 'stuck' with that one spell list we are trying to learn, until we learn it. So what happens if we keep failing and/or we find out we don't want that spell list after all, but wish to go for a different spell lists instead? Shouldn't the rules have some way to handle that shift?"
Consequently, this is how I read that part in Spell Law:
If a character, after making an unsuccessful Spell Gain Roll thus failing to learn new spells this level, wishes to begin the study of another list (next level), he may do so (next level) but he forfeits all skill ranks developed for the first spell list (accumulated through previous levels). Such skill ranks may be neither transferred nor retained (from one level to the next) if the character wishes to switch his efforts to some other spell list. He may, if he has enough development points (and if he wishes to switch his efforts now, without discarding already purchased ranks), allocate development points to bring the skill rank total with the first list to 20 and then begin to develop skill ranks for the second as described above.
-
That is fine. You read it more strictly than I did. I read it in the manner which best serves the players (i.e. and making the game more fun for them overall).
As I said, there is contradictory/confusing language in the book, thus different people can have different interpretations. The Official Interpretation is what I posted up above for those who want to know it.
-
That last paragraph does seem to relate to the next level of development. You don't caclulate your bonuses until after spending your DP, so you have no bonus to apply to a roll until after spending DP.
You can't purchase 1 rank of body development, roll it, get a 1, THEN decide to buy a second rank.
But, in terms of overall tone, the quote on page 19 of SL seems very appropriate:
Characters may not develop skill ranks for a variety of lists and count on the luck of the dice to give them spells. A character must develop only one ?list? of spells at a time.
The one exception, mentioned in the line above, and detailed below, doesn't involve luck, you "Auto" gain the list for 20 ranks without rolling. allowing "Buy ranks, roll, buy ranks, roll" would indeed allow you to trust to luck to give them spells.
-
Body Development -- actually, yes, you can do exactly that. There is nothing in the rules that prevent you from doing just what you described. The book lists the various "steps" of character development in a specific order, not because that order is vitally important to the process, but to keep things organized better, to make it easier on a player who is learning the game. If a player does not want to follow that order specifically, there are no rules against it.
Thus a player can, if he wants, buy a rank of Body Development, see how many hits it gives, and then purchase a second rank if he still has enough unspent DPs (and his profession allows the purchase of more than one rank per level).
Beside, Spell List Acquisition isn't like Body Development because once the list is successfully learned, the ranks disappear, so there is no "bonuses to total" in the same manner as other skills.
Yes, I also think that that quote is very appropriate. You learn one list at a time.
To me that says (along with everything else in that section), that you buy ranks in a list, and then determine whether or not you succeeded, and then go on to the next thing you want to develop, be it another portion of the same list, another list, or a different skill altogether.
That quote also says to me, that you cannot purchase ranks in 4 (or however many) lists at the same time and then roll for all of the lists at the same time (i.e. trusting in the luck of the dice to let you learn one or more of those lists).
You purchase ranks in 1 list, decide whether or not you learn it. Then, if you did not learn it, decide if you want to discard those ranks or buy more (and you can only buy more ranks in the same list) if you have enough points to bring the number of ranks to 20. If you did learn it, you can then move on to learning the next spell list portion (be it on the same list or a different one).
Or to put it another way, you can only have ranks in one list portion at a time. The ranks in one list portion have to disappear (through learning the portion, or through abandonment) before you can learn ranks in a different list portion. This way of viewing it is fully consistent with both what is written and the Official Interpretation that I made.
The one exception, mentioned in the line above, and detailed below, doesn't involve luck, you "Auto" gain the list for 20 ranks without rolling. allowing "Buy ranks, roll, buy ranks, roll" would indeed allow you to trust to luck to give them spells.
That "auto" gain is a bullet point, one of t. That would indicate that the bullet point is NOT the "one exception" that the earlier paragraph was talking about.
Here, let me use the quote from your earlier post...
When a character expends development points to acquire skill ranks, he may attempt to study one, and only one, list of spells by developing skill ranks for that list (see below for the only exception). Characters may not develop skill ranks for a variety of lists and count on the luck of the dice to give them spells. A character must develop only one list of spells at a time.
Once he has learned a portion of that list (i.e. made a successful Spell Gain Roll), his skill ranks in that list drop to zero. Then he may begin to develop skill ranks in another list or new skill ranks for a higher level portion of the same list.
...snip for brevity. . .
- If a character is able to allocate development points for a total of 20 skill ranks with a list (insuring its gain), he learns the list immediately and may spend DP to develop skill ranks for a second spell list. He will ?learn? the appropriate portion of the first list and be entitled to make a Spell Gain Roll for the second.
- If a character, after making an unsuccessful Spell Gain Roll, wishes to begin the study of another list, he may do so, but he forfeits all skill ranks developed for the first spell list. Such skill ranks may be neither transferred nor retained if the character wishes to switch his efforts to some other spell list. He may, if he has enough development points, allocate development points to bring the skill rank total with the first list to 20 and then begin to develop skill ranks for the second as described above.
Look at what I marked in blue. That paragraph specifically mentions making the spell gain roll, and then starting another list and no where in this section of Spell Law does it ever say "the next level" or "per level" in regards to making purchases in a second list.
The section in blue is below the section in red. That makes it a viable interpretation that what is marked in blue is the "exception". The part you marked in green is one of 2 bullet points. That makes it part of a set, a smaller portion of a greater whole, and thus less likely that it alone is the "exception", especially since the other bullet point also talks about learning another list portion and it also does not state, either implicitly or explicitly, that it cannot be done during the same level advancement process.
If anything, the part I marked in purple (especially the bolded portion) implies that what it is talking about can be done during the same level advancement period.
Moriarty -- The guy who wrote these rules liked to give every possible advantage to spell users that he could. It is part of the reason why spells went first in the original tactical system for RM2. Therefore, it would likely not be wrong to presume that his intention was to allow him to learn as many spell lists per level as he possibly could when he was playing.
-
Yet the line in purple clearly states that to develop the second list, you must either FORFEIT the ranks in the first list, or pay it up to 20 ranks before starting on a new list.
-
Yet the line in purple clearly states that to develop the second list, you must either FORFEIT the ranks in the first list, or pay it up to 20 ranks before starting on a new list.
In conjunction with the rest of the lines in that bullet point, yes it does say that (and I have not argued otherwise). It also implies that the purchase of the ranks may be done during that same level of development if you have enough DPs. And look at how all that works into the interpretation of the rules I provided above:
Core Rules
- You may only learn one portion of a list at a time.
- If your first attempt in a given level is successful, you may attempt to learn a second spell list portion (on a different list, or a higher portion of the list just learned). The core rules do not put any limitations on the number of ranks that must be purchased to allow this.
- If your first attempt in a given level is unsuccessful, you may attempt to learn a second (different) spell list portion (on a different list than the first), but doing so loses the ranks in the first spell list portion attempted.
- If your first attempt is unsuccessful, you may purchase more ranks in the same portion, but only if you can bring your total up to 20 ranks, which means you may learn the list automatically.
- If you purchase 20 ranks in a list, you automatically learn that portion of the spell list (no roll required), and may start purchasing ranks on a second list portion.
- Although it is not explicitly and clearly stated in the rule, a character may only purchase ranks in 2 different list portions per level. The core rules do say that only one list may be learned, and then it says that there is an exception. However, the way that the exceptions are worded, the character is allowed to attempt to learn a second list portion regardless of the outcome of the attempt to learn the first list portion.
- Each block of development points is considered a separate "level" for the purpose of learning spell lists. Just as each block of development points also counts separately for how many ranks may be purchased in a given skill. This means that Adolescent and Apprenticeship are fully considered to be separate levels for the learning of spell lists.
It says nothing about the abandoning of the rank
-
The blue portion is clarifying something different from what you're saying it does, take a look at this reference from my previous post above:
Once they have "learned" a portion of that list (i.e. made a successful Spell Gain Roll), their skill ranks in that list drop to zero. Then they may begin to develop skill ranks in another list or new skill ranks for a higher-level portion of the same list.
If you double check the context of this quoted text, I'm pretty sure what it means is:
Once you "Make" a list, the ranks spent in it drop to zero. . .this was to prevent any confusion with issues like having 10 ranks in SLA "Fire Law" learning pick 1-10, then the next level purchasing 10 ranks in SLA "Fire Law" learning pick 11-20, you only have 10 ranks, not 10+10 from last level 20. hence the whole "Drops to zero ranks" reference.
That's laid out pretty explicity on SL page 20-21
A Successful Roll: Once a successful Spell Gain Roll is made, the character is considered to have learned the use of the spells on the portion of the list that they were studying. They may then use those spells as long as such use complies with other rules for their use (power points, time requirements, etc.). The number of skill ranks in that list is reduced to zero. The character may develop more skill ranks for that list, but they apply to learning a higher-level portion of the list.
That doesn't seem to be the "One exception" in question, just a clarification due to the fact that you develop ranks in "Fire Law" get it, then develop "Fire Law" again to go for another portion, you need to start over from scratch with the new portion.
We all agree that 20 ranks allows for you to try for a 2nd list
if less than 20 ranks and a successful roll also allowed a try for a 2nd list. . .that would be two different exceptions.
The two bullet points lay out the only 2 ways to get 20 ranks, but, both refer to getting 20 ranks, so it's still refering to "One" exception.
1) Purchase 20 ranks this level
2) have left over ranks from a failed attempt in a previous level, and "top that off" to 20 ranks.
You dismissed the text of Character Law Option 14 (page 84). But it further rienforces the point, it doesn't say "with this option you need 20 ranks to go for a 2nd list" it says:
In order to attempt to gain two spell lists in one level of development, the first list must still be developed to 20 skill ranks (i.e. the primary stat bonus cannot be applied). However, the bonus can be applied to the roll for the second list (at least one skill rank is required).
That "Still" is pretty key. . .it's not changing anything about the core, it's saying "Even with this option in use, you still have to abide by the core rule about 20 ranking a list before you can go after a 2nd list in the same level.". . .this disalows a situation in which you have a +20 bonus to the stat and only spending 16 ranks to reach 100 bonus and auto learn the list. . . .you still need 20 ranks. . the "still" part is an affirmation that the core rule still applies, not a change.
The example on CL page 84 there says the same thing again:
Example: Bandring has a 90 Empathy and is a Magician (an Essence spell user) with a +10 primary stat bonus (Empathy). If he elects to expend the development points necessary to assure him of one spell
list (i.e. 20 skill ranks), he can then add his +10 bonus to any roll made to get a second list (if at least one more skill rank is developed).
If he only develops his first list with 18 skill ranks, he has a (18x5) + 10 = 100% chance of receiving this list, but he cannot attempt to develop a second list.
-
Personally I've never liked the spell list portion acquisition system. Some do I know. Our games will continue to use individual spell development with no roll for acquisition. This suits our style of games best.
Basically regardless of what is or is not an official ruling it still comes down to how you want to play your game. :)
-
Amusingly enough, I use individual spell SLA also. . .and highly reccomend it over the random method. . .heheh.
-
Amusingly enough, I use individual spell SLA also. . .and highly reccomend it over the random method. . .heheh.
As do I (Option 2.2 on page 22 of Spell law)...
And I just checked with Bruce. The old ICE never put any limits on how many lists may be learned in a given level, nor did they require 20 ranks per list either when they played. They actually did what the book says not to do (buy ranks in lots of lists and then made rolls trusting in lots of luck with the dice, and they did use the stat bonus option while doing this).
It is important to remember though, that most of their game rules were added on the fly and then codified later. Makes me think that the wording perhaps came from somebody abusing the method that they used...
Here are 2 items of interest as well. I just went back to my RM2 spell law and looked at it. There are 2 major differences between RM2 and RMC in regards to development and learning spell lists.
1) In RM2, once you went up a level, you immediately spent the DPs for the next level fo development, even though you did NOT gain any of those skills or even make your spell gain roll until you hit that next level (i.e. when you got enough XP to reach 3rd level you gained the skills purchase right after getting enough XP for 2nd level, and then you spent DPs for 4th level). Thus, the buying of 20 ranks also gave you the first spell off the portion you wanted right then (i.e. there was a reason for buying 20 ranks), and you got the rest of the list later on at the next level break.
2) RM2 Spell Law also contains some boxed text, which never made it into the RMC Spell Law, that recommends (i.e. it wasn't a rule, it was a suggestion) that pure and hybrid caster learn only a single portion per level and have a small chance of learning another. Basically telling the GM that the number of portions allowed to be learnable in a level helped set the power level of the game.
However, item #1 was completely changed so that you purchased you ranks when you went up a level, not right after going up the previous level and then waiting until the next level break to actually get what you purchased. This did require a number of changes of wording throughout all of the books.
However, both ICE and the RMC Team apparently missed some of the nuances of that change. So, while the "buy 20 ranks" is still there, the original reason FOR buying them (to get the first spell off the portion right away) was no longer there. That removed a big reason for a character to want to purchase 20 ranks in a list.
The boxed note (#2) was also completely dropped from Spell Law. And the actual mechanics of spell list acquisition were changed slightly in RMC (because of changing when the skills purchased were gained), and while some of the SLA text was changed, it wasn't changed enough (some of it still uses the same RM2 wording) for it to be fully clear and specific, and the new (RMC) wording DOES include contradictory text, and has spots that imply both interpretations.
So, what you have been arguing for would have been mostly correct, if the rules were still exactly like they were in RM2. Since those rules were changed (and you were part of the team that changed them), I have to go by the how the rules are currently written, not how they were written 20 years ago, not with what the rules originally may have intended or said. I have to go with what is written in the current version.
And the current version contains text that implies both 2 lists per level and 1 list per level. However, since that text that implies 1 list per level is inside an option, while the text that implies 2 lists per level is in the core portion of the rules, that means that the 2 lists per level implication wins, and will continue to win out.
You and the rest of the RMC Team changed the rules. Whether or not you intended to change them in the fashion that they ended up being changed is, at this point, a mute topic. You changed them and ICE accepted those changes, and what is posted up above is the official interpretation of those current rules as they are written.
You can continue to discuss this if you want, but unless there are new questions or issues raised, I am likely not going to respond again.
The official interpretation still stands and will continue to stand because it is based on what the currently published RMC text says.
-
I agree with Rasyr on this one, the official ruling has been made...
But this is Rolmaster and everyone makes his own house rules like they always have.
The most interesting part is the reference to the old days and the fact that you coud buy in lots of lists all at once. This opens up for some new house rules based on ancient RM2 standards.
I like the idea of being able to purchase ranks in multiple lists and rolling for each and every one, trustng in luck. Now, this is most likely not going to happen in our games but I like the thought.
-
I never denied you couldn't officially declare anything to be as you wish it to be. . .if fact I asked up above if you were making an official declaration in your official voice to make the rule conform to your interpretation, and you said no. . .
It's my opinion that the rule in the book doesn't read the way you're interpreting it, but that's just my opinion. (There are more instances that support the logic I was pointing out, take a look at the examples of Linthea's 0 and 1st level skill development in CL for yet another reference to 20 ranks.). .
So it's officially the way you say it is. Shrug. I can't argue with that.
I'll say that in context of that rule my support for the individual spell SLA method is even stronger, as that interpretation of the core rule is scary in actual play.
Thrud, having played with "Try as many lists as you want" + "Add realm stat bonus to SLA roll" + "Skill At magic BGOs out of RoCo1" I've seen games go rather far against the arms players. . .to the point where you had two options:
"Pour forth the magic items of artifact status unto the arms characters, that they might also drinketh at the river of power"
or
"Stoppeth playing those non casters, for they doth be whack."
-
I never denied you couldn't officially declare anything to be as you wish it to be. . .if fact I asked up above if you were making an official declaration in your official voice to make the rule conform to your interpretation, and you said no. . .
No, that wasn't what you asked. You asked if I was changing the rules in an official declaration.
Unless you're making an official change to the rules in your official voice?
To be perfectly clear -- the official interpretation did not and does not change the rules. The RMC Team changed the rules, and ICE accepted those changes -- all before the RMC books were printed.
The official interpretation only attempts to more clearly explain the rules as they are written in the RMC books (because the language was not as clear as originally thought). The official interpretation was and is based solely on the wording of ALL the rules invovled, and it does take the stat bonus option into consideration in making the interpretation.
Now, granted, perhaps that was not the manner in which the RMC Team intended to change the rules. But, it was also not something that was discussed in detail either, so it is also quite possible that both sides (RMC Team and ICE) were seeing different things in those changes and thinking the other side saw the same thing.
As for "scary"....
The way the old ICE did SLA, with "any number of lists" plus stats, etc.. -- yes, that is scary.
The way the current SLA is written - not really scary. The change is actually a minor one overall since the official interpretation only allows for 2 lists (and ONLY 2 lists) to be attempted to be learned in a single level, and that is ONLY if the first list was learned successfully.
Here is some examples showing how the official interpretation works.
Situation: Cormac is playing a Magicain and has 40 DPs and just made 2nd Level.
Example 1: Cormac buys 5 ranks in Fire Law (first list this level). He successfully rolls his SLA and learns that portion. He may now attempt to learn a second portion. There are only 3 possible outcomes
1-- He succeeds and he is done buy spells for the level.
2 -- He fails and then decides to buy 15 more ranks to make sure he learns it. If he cannot buy all 15, then he cannot buy any.
3 -- He fails and decides to wait until next level to try again to learn that portion.
Example 2: Cormac buys 5 ranks in Fire Law (first list this level). He fails his SLA roll. That leaves him with only 3 choices.
1 -- Buy enough ranks to give him 20 and allow him to still learn the list, then begin his attempt to learn a second list portion.
2 -- Abandon those ranks (and the DP spent on them) and begin trying to learn a second list.
3 -- Wait until the next level, and do not attempt to learn a second list this level.
The only difference that I can see between the official interpretation and your interpretation is that you don't want to allow a second list to even be possible UNLESS the character spends at least 20 DP (if pure or hybrid) on the first list. Sorry, but that is not how the RMC rules read.
-
My version also happens to show up not only in the option, but in the example character generation at the start of CL . .and a few other places.
Like under "unsuccessful roll" on P20 of SL:
An Unsuccessful Roll: If the SGR is not successful (i.e., less than 100), the skill ranks are not lost; rather it just means that the character has not gained a complete understanding of the forces to be utilized. After they have had time to ?ponder their experiences? and have gained further ?understanding of the universe? (i.e., when their experience level increases), they may make another Spell Gain Roll, gaining the full benefit of their skill ranks in the list (which they may increase by further develop- ment in the meantime).
seems to pretty clearly state that if you fail an SLA roll, you need to go up another level before you can try again. (I don't see how this allows for you to buy some more ranks this level to get up to 20 ranks) (Which, if you take that reference in context of the 2nd bullet point to the left, again rienforces that there is one, and only one method to get 2 lists in one level, as the opening para says)
Lets put it this way, if you assume that what I'm saying is a possible interpretation, the fact that all other casual references in the books rienforce that interpretation, even if you want to say each of those other points is tangential, as a whole, they seem to indicate which interpretation was intended.
If you think what I'm saying is just impossible, then indeed the other references are meaningless.
Similarly, if your interpretation was the only possible one, you were making no changes, but if any other interpretation was possible, you were making a change to negate the other possability.
If you want, I can continue discussing this ad infinitum, but after the point where you declare an official ruling, I'm just whistling in the wind and wasting my time. (And indeed you're wasting your time.)
As to the overall effect. . .A 50% return on gambles. . .the most efficiant play on your interpretation would be good for 5 DP per level for Pures/Hybrids. . .and 5 DP per level (admitedly, on average) is nothing to sneeze at in RMC. . .thats a 2nd rank of PPD for instance. . .I personally feel casters already get too good a deal, an extra 12.5% DP per level is a "scary" push of balance even more in their favor.
-
My version also happens to show up not only in the option, but in the example character generation at the start of CL . .and a few other places.
no it doesn't. It said the ranks were bought. It never gives any explanation why. It doesn't even imply a reason for buying 20 ranks, except
Unless you can provide a specific instance where the core rules (not an option) specifically and definitively says only 1 list per level unless you purchase 20 ranks in the first list, there is nothing further to discuss.
I pointed out before that the text was confusing and contradictory. I pointed out the specific reasoning and text used to make the official interpretation. The official interpretation goes with what is more strongly implied and what is likely to be more fun for the players. (i.e. slightly less restrictive than the other potential interpretation).
And it was left as an official interpretation, and not made an official ruling, so that others could interpret it as they wanted. By making an official interpretation, that allows a GM to look and say, "okay, here is how ICE says they would rather it be done, but I would rather do it this way".
And as I said before, what you and the RMC Team may have intended may not be how ICE was reading it.
-
Does this logic path make sense to you?
1) The text under "Unsucessful Roll" on SL page 20 right column.
An Unsuccessful Roll: If the SGR is not successful (i.e., less than 100), the skill ranks are not lost; rather it just means that the character has not gained a complete understanding of the forces to be utilized. After they have had time to ?ponder their experiences? and have gained further ?understanding of the universe? (i.e., when their experience level increases), they may make another Spell Gain Roll, gaining the full benefit of their skill ranks in the list (which they may increase by further develop- ment in the meantime).
states that if you fail a roll, you must wait until the next level to attempt that list again. It also states that you may further develop that list with more ranks at that next level.
2) Previously, you refuted the two bullet points could be the "One and only" exception, since, there are 2 of them.
3) On the previous page of this discussion, in reply #9 Moriarty pointed out that the 2nd bullet point was merely pointing out how to handle getting 20 ranks over multiple levels, and that therefore both bullet points merely lay out 2 variations of "20 ranks auto gain, then roll for 2nd list"
4) You refuted his interpretation in reply #10 as more strict than you'd choose to use, and not player friendly.
5) based on the quote in #1 of this reply. . .moriarty is actually exactly correct in his analysis.
6) If #5 is true. . .then the two bullet points do both lay out "20 ranks auto gain, then roll for 2nd list". . .they merely lay out starting from scratch, or starting with left over ranks from a failed roll of a previous level.
7) If #6 is true. . .then they seem to be the "One and only one" method the above reference, is referring to. . .which was the root of this entire discussion.
I think your logic chain has one provably false link at step 4 outlined above, and Moriarty's point at step 3 is provably true.
The game system is certainly complex enough where one misunderstanding or mistake can lead to a chain of false premises and conclusions.
It's good to have you around, because you can fix mistakes or misunderstandings with "Official Corrections" which sort them out. . .but as long as you're discussing this on a factual basis, rather than "I'm officially over-riding this to correct it." I thought it worthwhile to point out if you seem to be mistaken. . .
-
The original intent of the rule was that a character would only receive a single Spell Gain Roll per level ... the only way to gain more than one list was to purchase 20 ranks in the first list, and then a smaller number of ranks in the second.
I had never actually met anyone who had read the passages in the way you have interpreted them ... allowing an undefined/unlimited number of Spell Gain Rolls.
Note that the rules for allowing the "Buy 20 ranks and you get the list" specifically state that even if you have stats/etc that would otherwise add to your Spell Gain Roll, they are not counted and you must purchase ALL of the 20 ranks ... as otherwise you would have to roll for the first list, and thus you would not be able to roll for another list
-
I have deleted my original post because I was approached privately by an Assistant Administrator and told that they felt that I have come across too strongly. They were right. I wish to offer a public apology to Cormac for that previous response. I shouldn't have let a bit of frustration color my post.
The original intent of the rule was that a character would only receive a single Spell Gain Roll per level ... the only way to gain more than one list was to purchase 20 ranks in the first list, and then a smaller number of ranks in the second.
Please see my earlier comments regarding the intentions of the RMC Team versus the way that the rules were written.
I had never actually met anyone who had read the passages in the way you have interpreted them ... allowing an undefined/unlimited number of Spell Gain Rolls.
Please note that I have never advocated that. I have always advocated no more than 2 lists per level. You can see this in my very first posts on this thread and in my response near the top of the page.
Note that the rules for allowing the "Buy 20 ranks and you get the list" specifically state that even if you have stats/etc that would otherwise add to your Spell Gain Roll, they are not counted and you must purchase ALL of the 20 ranks ... as otherwise you would have to roll for the first list, and thus you would not be able to roll for another list
Again, this has already been addressed in previous posts. Please refer to them.
-
The two list per level was how we played it back in the day, until SUC was released and the optional individual spell level development rules were in it.
I played mages mostly, so I based my entire level designs on this rule. Of course, we allowed the realm stat mod to be added to the learn roll, which made a high Em mod very nice indeed.
lynn
-
I'm sorry to be a pest, but you keep using "Interpretation" rather than "Ruling" as if you're not changing anything. . . .you have the right to change whatever you want, but some things here are more than interpretation:
Bullet point 4 directly contradicts the text of "Unsuccessfull roll" in the right column.
Bullet point six is elimiating the "Still" from that text.
All of this clips out the "One and only one" portion of the text.
I'm merely confused as to why you're avoiding baldly stating that you're making a change, and keep stating it's a "clarification". . .if you just say you're changing it, we won't have to keep pointing out that you're changing it.
A few non RMC team members seem to have "read" the rule the way I've stated it (They replied on the first page as such in context) so to state that your version (which in a few points directly contradicts the text in the book) is the only clear way to rule it seems off. This is the way you "choose" to rule it, not the "way it's written". You could just as easily "choose" to rule it the way the RMC team meant it, or the way average posters like Moriarty read it.
You have the authority to cut across the gordian knot, to make the rule whatever you want or need it to be, I don't understand the reservation at doing so. If the above is what ICE wants, then make it so, but since it directly contradicts the text on at least one point, it's not merely an unbiased, factual interpretation of the text as written.
Is there any reason not to just close this with "I am changing the rule to the bullet points as given, as this is what ICE wants?"
In the end this:
Nor is that "exception" explicitly determined/explained, which leaves it totally open to interpretation. That means that it could be the comments in the next paragraph, or the bullet points 2 or 3 paragraphs later. However, those 2 bullet points form a list and a list is a single item. But, those 2 bullet points also talk about 2 different things, which makes it unlikely that a single bullet point would be considered as the "exception".
Seems to be the point of contention in the difference in the rule interpretation you're making. . . .answered in reply 24 above.
They're not two different things, they merely cover the one exception, depending on if you started the level with ranks left over from a previous level. . . .which was understood clearly by some people who read it. (also as laid out in #24 above.)
Shrug. . .the funniest part of this is that I personally hate random SLA, and never use it. . . .we both prefer the same non random SLA by individual spells option to the core rule in question. . .
-
--Moderation--
This thread has started turning into statements dangerously close to telling others what to do. I'm making this as a general warning here in the thread and not calling any specific individuals out at this time. If it continues, I will though.
Please be sure you remember this part of the ROC in future postings:
Do not tell others how to act or what to do: Only the Admins and the Moderators of the ICE forums are empowered to tell others to act in a specific fashion. If you are not a Moderator or Admin, then you should not be telling others how to think, act, or anything else. Wording of what you say is very key here. The Admins and Moderators cannot read intent or infer what you meant to say, they can only read your specific wording.
--End Moderation--
-
The official interpretation does not change the rules. The rules were changed when RMC was published. All I have been doing is to attempt to better explain that rule as ICE interprets it from the wording in the published product.
The official interpretation was derived from reading the rules involved, with absolutely no bias or preconceptions about what was or was not intended. That is all that it is, an attempt to better explain what is already there.
It appears as if you looking at it through the filter of what you intended, so to you, it likely does appears that I am changing things. However, what you intended was not what ended up being printed, and I made the interpretation based on what was printed.
-
I want to apologise to Tim - he is correct in stating that he had not advocated developing more than two lists in a given level.
I would state an alternate ruling that could be made official -
Only one Spell Gain roll can be made per level, and this occurs AFTER all DP's have been allocated.
This is similar to the way in which Hit's are determined *after* you have spent all of your DPs ... you don't (shouldn't ?) buy one rank ... roll to see how many hits you get ... buy another rank ... roll ... buy another rank ... roll.
Note that in Character Law, where the levelling up process is detailed, it is clearly stated that all dps are spend prior to rolling for any of these elements.
Note: with the "Two list limit" ... do you get 2 Spell Gain Rolls or just one?
Finally - we need to clarify whether this two-list limit affects the various individual spell acquisition methods ... as a corollary - RMSS allows up to 3 ranks in up to 5 lists without penalty (any ranks purchased after this point are increased in cost).
-
I would state an alternate ruling that could be made official -
Only one Spell Gain roll can be made per level, and this occurs AFTER all DP's have been allocated.
The problem is that the rules never state that, and do explicitly state something else.
This is similar to the way in which Hit's are determined *after* you have spent all of your DPs ... you don't (shouldn't ?) buy one rank ... roll to see how many hits you get ... buy another rank ... roll ... buy another rank ... roll.
This was another point that was actually addressed early on in the thread. ;D
Note that in Character Law, where the levelling up process is detailed, it is clearly stated that all dps are spend prior to rolling for any of these elements.
Can you point out where it specifically says that? I wasn't able to find it. I found a spot in Chapter 2 (which is basically a walk through example and meant to show a method of creating a character, so is more organized than actual level development would proceed in practice) about where it says that the player is allowed to make SGR after expending the DPs for each of both levels. At best, that implies what you are stating, but only implies. It could also be implying that ALL the SGR are made after spending DPs from both levels (and it never says "all" in reference to the DPs).
As I have stated previously -- the wording in both Character Law and Spell Law is not as clear and concise as it should be -- and ICE is the one ultimately responsible for that. I have only been attempting to interpret the existing published text in a coherent and complete manner, after taking all of the text into consideration.
The important part, IMO, is that the text on page 19 (RMC Spell Law) says that with a successful SGR, you may start buying for a second list. That is an explicit statement. There is nothing explicit that counters that. And half of the "implied" things are in examples or options, or places other than the core rules of the text. And the other half are worded in such a manner that they could work with either interpretation.
Note: with the "Two list limit" ... do you get 2 Spell Gain Rolls or just one?
Is there any spot in the book that specifically states you are only allowed 1 Spell Gain Roll? Not 100% positive, but I am fairly sure there isn't (yes, I could be wrong in that).
I would say you get 1 SGR per list that you are allowed to buy ranks in, but that they have to be made in order -- i.e. you buy ranks in first list - make SGR -- results determines what your can do next:
Success -- may buy ranks in second list and then roll to see if you learn it.
Failure -- 1) may buy enough ranks in first list to bring to 20 and then start second list; 2) may lose ranks in first list and start second list; or 3) may wait until next level and try again for first list.
And that the SGR is made when the player decides that he has spent enough DPs on the list (if he is wrong, then he has to buy enough ranks to give him 20 ranks in that list if he wants to learn it this level and/or go on to learn a second list).
And also, all of the text implies no more than 2 lists, maximum, may be learned per level. So that puts a limit of no more than 2 list portions maximum each level, regardless of how many were actually learned.
Finally - we need to clarify whether this two-list limit affects the various individual spell acquisition methods ... as a corollary - RMSS allows up to 3 ranks in up to 5 lists without penalty (any ranks purchased after this point are increased in cost).
I don't see why they should or would be changed. (though I usually don't allow more than the first 5 lists myself).
-
Two clear quotes that seem to indicate that onlt one SGR per level is intended:
Spell Law page 19:
When a character expends development points to acquire skill ranks, they may attempt to study one, and only one, list of spells by developing skill ranks for that list (see below for the only exception).
The use of only clearly indicates that there is only one exception (page 20):
If a character is able to allocate development points for a total of 20 skill ranks with a list (ensuring its gain without the use of a stat bonus), they learn the first list immediately and may begin to develop skill ranks for a second spell list and are entitled to make a Spell Gain Roll for the second.
Also, from ChL page 27:
Characters are entitled to make spell gain rolls after expending the development points for each of the two levels
so the SGR is made AFTER all DP are spent, so reallocating points is not possible.
-
Hello everybody,
I can't understand how such wondeful people as those writing in these forums can become so aggressive when it comes to rules details... It's all still a game, isn't it ?
Maybe we should consider sticking to the spirit of the law rather than the text ? And if there is a point left unclear despite the great efforts of the writers, maybe each of us can decide which interpretation he likes the best after reading everybody's mind in the forum. No ?
I know I am neither Admin nor Moderator and offer my apologies if I am offending someone with this post.
Respectfully,
Fidoric, ICE games & authors fan
-
Hello everybody,
I can't understand how such wondeful people as those writing in these forums can become so aggressive when it comes to rules details... It's all still a game, isn't it ?
Maybe we should consider sticking to the spirit of the law rather than the text ? And if there is a point left unclear despite the great efforts of the writers, maybe each of us can decide which interpretation he likes the best after reading everybody's mind in the forum. No ?
I know I am neither Admin nor Moderator and offer my apologies if I am offending someone with this post.
Respectfully,
Fidoric, ICE games & authors fan
Fidoric,
I cannot imagine that you have offended anyone with your post. I think you stated things very well. I also appreciate a forum member stating the most important thing in this entire discussion which is that it up to each GM to determine how to interpret the rules for their game.
Things did get a little aggressive... but I think it speaks volumes to ICE as a company that they are willing to communicate with fans and authors so very openly; that allows others to get a glimpse into ICE author's thoughts and interpretations and then use that to influence their own game play if they so wish.
Remember even authors and ICE employees are on equal footing just as all forum participants, customers, and fans when discussing matters. We're all human, and our opinions are all equal. The only time there should be more weight given to something is if there is an official ruling or official errata which can only come from ICE and they will make it clear if it is. Even then, remember the first rule of gaming: the GM is the final say to throw out, change, or add to any rule he likes. This irritates the rules lawyers to death... I say, don't game with them, there is more fun to be had elsewhere.
-
Exactly my point, thanks Lazvon.
-
[Wayne Campbell] Do these guys know how to party, or what?[/Wayne Campbell]
-
Dutch206 cautiously swims out into the deep water, wary of shark attacks:
Regarding the spell acquisition debate in this thread: If one spell gain per level was the intention of the rules, then how do you explain the NPC Table on page 158 of Character Law Classic?
Pure Essence User NPC Spells per level
NPC Level / Lists to 10th level /Lists to 20th level
1 3
3 6
5 9
7 12
10 16
15 8 8
20 3 15
As I see it, the only way to get sixteen spell lists by 10th level is to have at least 6 levels where two successful spell gain rolls were made.
dutch206 quickly heads back to shallower water
-
Nobody was denying more than 1 list per level was possible, merely if one needed to 20 rank the first list to have a chance at a 2nd list.
Don't forget 0 level.
-
I'd like to stand everything on it's head...
At Lv1 you get powerpoint, thus you can cast spells. The way I figure it casting spells is essential to learning spell lists. You have to try it irl, book smarts doesn't cut it.
How can you have 3 lists to Lv10 at Lv1?
I guess ruleswise you don't have to be able to cast any spells to learn the lists?
-
Far as I know, the only rule akin to that is that you need to be able to cast a spell daily to learn Directed Spells for it. (normally, innately, or via an item.)
-
At level one you get PowerPoint, at level two you get Excel,.... ;D
I would say you are correct, Thrud. However, that's why Mage's Guilds exist...to make sure outsiders aren't learning their secrets. Or, you could take the Shadow World approach, and give each realm its own magical language. Thus, only followers of the Dark Gods would be able to read books in Var Arnak, only Essence users would be able to read books in Uscurac, etc....