Topic: Spell Law, RM1 vs RM2 vs revised

[Raizenbrayne]

Hi all, first time posting. I've run RM2 before, but these days typically other games.

I once ran some old school OD&D/AD&D games with the RM1 Arms Law criticals charts, to pretty memorable effect, and it made me consider adding the first edition of Spell law—and possibly even the other RM1 single books from there; as an old school gamer, I like the idea of capturing the feeling of having individual modular RM books slowly coming out and replacing the core AD&D mechanics.

My question is about Spell Law in RM, RM2 and RM2 revised. I have RM2 revised, but I would really like to play from RM1 if I can—is that possible from the revised edition? What are the differences?

my understanding is that Spell Law in RM2 is basically the same as RM1, but with 3 added pages of optional rules. The revised edition has many more pages, but from my internet searches I can't tell if this is just because of layout changes or because the actual content is updated/expanded (or if those expanses are discrete, or edited into the main text).

If I want to run things from the very first edition, but can't find/afford a first edition, should I be looking for an RM2 copy of Spell Law, or will my revised book do the job of providing an 'authentic' text of the original publication?

[yammahoper]

RM2 Spell Law is fine.  It is slightly better than RMI SL.

RMSS Spell Law is fine too, with very few difficulties, those mostly issues with bonuses.  The list again are slightly better, with less holes on spell lists.

[Cory Magel]

If you are comfortable with slight tweaks and adjusting the bonuses accurately virtually any RM spell list (from any version) is viable in any version campaign.  We convert stuff from pre-RMSS into RMSS all the time.  Although moving from Pre-RMSS to RMSS you need to watch the power-levels a bit.  Going from any other RM version to RM2 shouldn't pose any problems aside from, as yammahoper said, the bonuses provided in post RM2 lists needing conversion.

[markc]

Raizenbrayne,
 Welcome to the ICE forums.


 As to your question you can use any of them, I myself learned to play RM2 with using the RMSS Spell Law.
MDC

[Tommi]

Even the bonuses are mostly related to bladeturn. In RM2 bladeturn in most lists gives -100 mod to an attack. Evasion  (Monks spell) gives -50  and IIRC in some lists bladeturn only gives -50 to incoming attack. In RMSS all these spells give -50. I personally don't see problem that evasion in RM2 is -50 while other are -100 as the means to achieve the increased DB differs - improved dodging (evasion) needs movement while bladeturn is result of magic force affecting directly to the attack.   

To my understanding RM1 spell law ids the stabled version with ram headed demon on the balcony. Where are you going to get that? We used that ans RM SL together and noticed no differences except RM1 layout is really bad.

[Peter R]

We run a group where most of the players own and bring their own books and we have the 1st edition Spell Law, 2nd Edition and the RMC spell law all being used in the same session with no noticable conflicts. On the very rare case where there is a difference the GM just rules on what he wants the rule to be.

[Cory Magel]

Even the bonuses are mostly related to bladeturn.

You also need to pay attention to attack and skill bonuses, but in particular bonuses to stats - but if you look at the stat bonuses for the two version groups (RM1/RM2 and RMSS/RMFRP) the math should be fairly obvious.

[markc]

 IIRC, there are some spells in 1st edition that are listed as instant that were changed later to have regular casting times. But I do not remember right off the top of my head which ones they were as it has been quite some time since I played in that game.
 So the biggest change if I had to pick one is some of the spells casting times.

MDC

[Raizenbrayne]

Thanks for the welcome and responses, everyone. This really helps a lot.

It sounds like there's actually very little between 1st edition and revised 2nd edition that's substantially different to really gripe about. Knowing me and my group I tend to play with, I'll probably still want to hunt down a copy of the first edition booklets one day and try running things from those, 'just cuz', but in the meantime it seems like my RM2 revised set will do the job running old-school RM magic in old-school AD&D just fun.

As a side note, probably deserving its own thread: Has anyone here actually tried this? Running individual RM books as modular rules in other games, I mean. I've done this many times with Arms Law (which is actually how I got into RM in the first place, running other games with Arms Law thrown in), and regularly pull out GM Law for whatever system I run, but I've never once tried running Spell Law in another game. My impression is that even in the beginning, you could only really use it if you were also using Arms Law.

[Cory Magel]

We played D&D 2nd Ed wayyy back and had started to integrate RM1 and RM2 stuff into it.  Mainly spell lists and some critical conversion.  It's been a LONG time so I don't remember much, but I do know we were running spells on a spell point system rather than having to memorize them individually.

[yammahoper]

I've used RM for Gamma World and Tunnels and Trolls.  Mostly arms law.  I have used some spell list in RQ.

[Peter R]

I've used RM for Gamma World and Tunnels and Trolls.  Mostly arms law.  I have used some spell list in RQ.

i haven't played Gamma World since I was at school! There was an amazing mutant chicken, it was called something like a Gallus Gallus 513. It was my favourite 'monster' for about 6 months.

[Raizenbrayne]

My first two RPGs were WEG's Star Wars and MeRP, in the same year. I started using the MeRP critical tables in many different games I was playing, then upgraded to Arms Law critical tables when I discovered that. I only ran full Arms Law combat when playing MeRP and later RM, though. I've never tried Spell Law or Character Law (for skills) by themselves, but I think each one would probably have to rely on the previous book for use: much of Spell Law would probably require Arms Law, and most of Character Law would probably require both AL and SL.

[Cory Magel]

So, the critical tables were your 'gateway drug' to RM.

[Raizenbrayne]

Haha, very much so! I still play a variety of different RPGs, and over the years my play style has changed more toward embracing in each game's own rules as part of the 'spirit' of the game, instead of doing things like always importing RM's crit. tables.

Recently, though, I've really been wanting to restart an old by-the-book, 1970s-era D&D game I had going, where we'd start with OD&D, slowly phasing in the original AD&D manuals as they 'get published', and then slowly start phasing in the RM 1e books in the order they were published, until we end up with RM2. The guys I'd play with have all played O/AD&D and RM before, but none of us are old enough to have been playing back in the day when those books were first coming out, one at a time. It would really be nifty to sit through the campaign and watch it evolve from '1976' OD&D to '1984' RM.