Topic: RMC multiclassing HARP-style

[mrjam]

I was thinking of using the multiclassing rules in HARP for RMC.

In HARP switch class means switch develpement point cost for skills and switch bonus granted from the class. In RMC I use the optional rule 23.1 "Level Bonus For Professions (RM2)", so multiclassing should mean exactly the same thing.

Do you think it is balanced? What problems could I encounter?

[markc]

 There are many problems with what you would like to do. Not to put you off but this has been talked about many times and you might want to do a search of the archives to see what others have said about it.


 But here is what I see as the problems:
1: Vastly different skill DP cos's and access to spell lists
2: Some have said to just average the DP costs and level bonuses but that can cause problems
3: Again access to spell lists
4: Generally the ones who will benefit the most will be the pure's as there DP costs are the most different so Semi's and Hybrids get shafted and tend to lose their "ability to adapt" vs the other professions.


You can do Training Packages to help out in some areas. Or simply just give some skills in adolescence in addition to the ones in the book.


 What are you trying to do? Or Accomplish?


MDC

[mrjam]

Thank you very much for the answer.

Sorry if the argument has already been discussed many times. I tried to use the "search" field, but it give me only a topic (about "how make rolemaster better"), and in there multiclassing was barely discussed.

I was trying to recreate different character concepts not covered from the core classes, without the need of new classes (i.e. a sort of "magent" using a thief/mentalist multiclass, without the need of a "magent" class). Plus, I like the idea that a character can, after some levels, chooses to change "focus".

From what you say, it seems that the HARP multiclassing is unbalanced and problematic too (i.e. access to "sphere"). Or are there differences that my limited experience with both systems don't let me see?

[Marc R]

If you are playing HARP, and you switch from one profession to it's cost structure opposite, all of your 4 cost skills are 2, and your 2 cost skills are 4. . .you may gain additional spell or skill access.

But if you say swap a Fighter for a mage, you go from 1/X weapon costs and 20 spell list costs, to 9 weapon cost and 1/* spell cost.

HARP profession variations are not extreme, so the cost in DP of changing professions takes a while to be earned back vs a character who didn't change professions and just paid 4 costs. . .in RM the profession variations are extreme, so you would rapidly be able to make back the cost variation.

i.e. a 4th level fighter switches to Magician for 20 DP cost, another 4th level fighter stays a fighter. ignoring the benefit of 10 base lists, they both purchase 2 ranks in an open spell list. . .it costs the fighter-turned magician 2 dp (+20 to change professions) = 22, it costs the fighter who stayed a fighter 40 DP . . .

In reverse, a 4th level magician become a fighter purchases 1 rank in sword and 1 in bow, it costs them 3+20=23. . .the magician who remains a magician does the same and it costs them 9+20=29 DP. . .

That's merely 2 ranks of a skill in each example, for a full level - 20 DP cost you can likely do as well as a savings of 400 DP vs a character who didn't change professions. . .so what do you charge for it?

Thus the wide range of cost variation makes switching professions vastly a better deal in RM than it is in HARP. . .

[Viktyr Gehrig]

From what you say, it seems that the HARP multiclassing is unbalanced and problematic too (i.e. access to "sphere"). Or are there differences that my limited experience with both systems don't let me see?

There's much less difference in skill costs between Professions in HARP, so the ability to multiclass is less unbalancing. In HARP, skills (including spells) can cost either 2 DP per rank or 4 DP per rank and any character can purchase a 30 DP Talent that allows them to learn the spells from a different Sphere-- compared to the 20 DP Talent that allows an additional Profession. HARP is designed to accommodate multiclass characters in ways that Rolemaster just isn't.

I don't have any advice for how to balance multiclassing in Rolemaster. If I were running a game, I'd allow a character to switch Professions for 20 DP with suitable downtime, but I wouldn't allow them to switch back HARP-style.

[markc]

Thank you very much for the answer.

Sorry if the argument has already been discussed many times. I tried to use the "search" field, but it give me only a topic (about "how make rolemaster better"), and in there multiclassing was barely discussed.

I was trying to recreate different character concepts not covered from the core classes, without the need of new classes (i.e. a sort of "magent" using a thief/mentalist multiclass, without the need of a "magent" class). Plus, I like the idea that a character can, after some levels, chooses to change "focus".

From what you say, it seems that the HARP multiclassing is unbalanced and problematic too (i.e. access to "sphere"). Or are there differences that my limited experience with both systems don't let me see?

 IIRC the normal search just does current topic and you have to do an archive search to go into the old stuff.


 No problem there has juts been a lot of posts on this and I do not remember what everyone has said before.


 I agree with you that it is tougher to create a concept in RMC or RX then in RMSS. As RMSS you can usually do this with a Training Package (TP). RMC is tougher as you would in general have to adjust skill costs and allow access to spell lists. Which have been does IIRC by creating a talent frame work or a TP framework and let them do it that way.


 Another option in which I learned RM2 was to use the professions from RMSS in RM2 and use the skill costs that map over. You use a 100 DP scale vs what they use in RMC as the DP costs are higher and you can use the TP idea from RMSS. You use the stat bonus rules from RMC, the level bonus rules from RMC (You will have to create some of your own for the classes you do not have), the skill rules from RMC and the idea of TP's from RMSS. I think it worked OK.


 For Races some of the old Rolemaster Companions (RoCo) had races info in them. I do not know of another source right off the top of my head.


 I would buy Spell law also has it has spells in one place and has some nifty rules in it that can help a GM a lot. 


 I also like PDF's so I can create a binder for each player so they have everything they need in one place. It can just get $$ for spell users as they get more spell lists.


 Does that help at all?
MDC


BTW, I am mainly a RMSS/FRP player and some might consider me biased on the topic. But IMO your question's are one of the big areas that IMO RMSS fixes in RM2, ie no need to create a new profession to simulate something just create a TP or use a profession and change some minor things so it now fits what you have in mind.
 Note: IMO the GM should design the new profession not players as players you can min max things better and GM's tend to think more of balance.


MDC