Tell Me about Rolemaster

[Ahglock]

I've always wanted to try rolemaster but I could never make it very far into the rule books. I usually like reading rule books, but something about how role master was written bored me to tears. I am not referring to how i envisioned how it would play out but to the writing style. I even had trouble reading enough to understand how to make a character.

I got interested in it due to playing Fantasy Hero and back in the day they were using the same world as rolemaster as there default setting. It sounded like a fun world I picked up a box set with like 3 or 4 books in it, and couldn't even read the magic book and i love magic books.

I ended up just running fantasy hero which is maybe my favorite game. I actually really like the spell colleges in fantasy hero that were obviously modeled a bit after the magic in role master.

 

[Greg K]

It is playable, but it is too hard to get reliable successes, especially outside of your class's expertise. I do understand the Moving Manuever system, it just took me a while. My problem is that skills are much harder to use in RM than in, say, D&D. In RM you have to role 111 to succeed at a normal task. That's like a DC 22 in D&D. Routine tasks require an 81 (111-30). That's like a DC 16. I know there are rules for re-trys, but in the end you have to roll a 111 to actually succeed. In RM it is also very easy to rack up the penalties. In order to routinely get your 111, you have to have very high bonuses. The best way to get those bonuses is to focus on the skills you can most cheaply get multiple ranks of every level.

I don't think most RM DMs play the 111=success system strictly, however, which is probably a good thing.

Ah, I see your mistake. 111 or higher is only if partial or extra successes are possible. If partial or extra success are not possible, success is 100% or higher (RMSS p.139). So 111 or higher would be kind of like situations for multiple successes needed for a complex skill check in Unearthed Arcana or multiple succeses for a skill challenge. However the bit of 100 or higher is easy to miss (which goes back to bad organization).

 

[Greg K]

There are good free character generation programs over at the ICE site.

Some of the things that I really like about RMSS over previous RM2
- Adolescent Development: You get free ranks in various skills based on your culture and then free ranks to spend on hobby skills
- the skill categories (although I think Medical skills should be seperated from Vocational skills and given its own category. I dislike the RM2 categorization of some skills
- Training Packages
- Paladins are a core profession and their spell list is not broken
- Martial Arts Companion: Pretty good expansion product
- Channeling Companion: Awesome product.
- The Companions are much better done than the RM2 companions.

My only real dislike of RMSS is buying ranks in categories. Also, Rural men got shafted on their list of hobby skills (but this is a minor complaint and easily fixed).

 

[Lizard]

I completely (Heart) Rolemaster, but it scares off so many people I'm unlikely to play it. The 1995 revision -- RMSS -- is probably the best, as it fixes several issues with the older version (namely, first level characters are fairly survivable) while still retaining a lot of the detail.

It scales very nicely from 'peasants with pitchforks' to 'demigods at war', and while it's very very rare, a kobold with a rusty knife CAN kill the mightiest hero on the planet. The Talents system (expanded in Talent Law) offers you a lot of room for customization. The large number of classes and training packages allows you a great deal of flexibility, and the fact any character can learn any skill (albiet with difficulty) frees you from many of the limits of a class based system.

On the downside, the "Percentage of action" movement system has always been very difficult for me to grasp, and character creation can take a VERY long time. Healing is slow and painful, and you can end up with broken legs or missing eyes that will plague your character for a long time. The game has evolved only a bit from the early 80s version, and while it's been expanded, cleaned up, balanced, and revised, at its core, it has a lot of the design elements that marked that era. (D&D 4e, by contrast, has almost no mechanics in common with AD&D 1e).

 

[Urbannen]

Ah, I see your mistake. 111 or higher is only if partial or extra successes are possible. If partial or extra success are not possible, success is 100% or higher (RMSS p.139). So 111 or higher would be kind of like situations for multiple successes needed for a complex skill check in Unearthed Arcana or multiple succeses for a skill challenge. However the bit of 100 or higher is easy to miss (which goes back to bad organization).

That's interesting. I've never noticed that before. However, I think that that rule would only be used in special cases. It obviates the Partial Success, Near Success, and Absolute Success results in the Static Manuever Tables. I think almost any skill check result could fall into one of those categories. Can you think of a case of when to use the 100% rule for a static maneuver?

And a 100% result is still equivalent to a DC 20 in D&D - not easy at all.

I like the way the system has a 4E-esque Skill Challenge system built in with the re-trys. It's actually pretty cool. But in order to have skills you can rely on you really have to max them out. As I said, with limited DPs, it encourages specialization. It's something people should know about going in.

 

[Urbannen]

- the skill categories (although I think Medical skills should be seperated from Vocational skills and given its own category. I dislike the RM2 categorization of some skills

Amen.

- Another great thing about RM already mentioned: parrying. D&D should have the same mechanic for free, not with with silly Combat Expertise.

- Also: low level spellcasters are very tricky. The only 1st level combat spell for Essence users is Sleep V. I saw a new player try to make a cool ice elementalist at first level, but she quickly found out that she didn't get any decent spells into 3rd or 4th level.

 

[Thunderfoot]

Yikes. The more I hear, the more I'm actually adverse to the system. Realism is not something I see as a positive attribtue, nor am I good at math on my feet (as Cirex pointed out using calculators just to speed things up!?).

The process sounds fairly labored, with several steps just to resolve a single action.

Let me challenge you with this. When I was in HS I was a math touting geek with a love of history.... I thought RM was WAY too complicated for what it was designed to do. The system is VERY precise (probably the best in the business) but it CAN be very unwieldy.

Even on all these reccomendations you should make an attempt to try it because it may be the thing you have been looking for, or something you can modify to make it the ideal system for which you've been looking.

 

[RFisher]

If I squint, RM and D&D 3e look a lot alike to me.

As has been said, however, RM is quite modular. You can stick to a minimum that is simpler than D&D 3e, or you can go crazy with the optional rules and have something even more complex than D&D 3e. ICE had an attitude of “publish every idea and leave it up to individual groups to decide what to use”

1) Once you finish character creation, it's just a roll of percentile dice + modifier = outcome to anything.

Yep. It’s “the d% system” instead of the d20 system™.

2) Charts for everything. EVERYTHING. Charts charts charts.

Arms Law has a lot of charts, but they didn’t really slow down combat as much as I’d suspected. (And this was back when D&D combat was quick.)

That modular bit plays here as well. You don’t have to use every chart you see.

3) It's "realistic". For instance, while there are "Hit Points", most injuries come from a "Critical hit" table, and the degree of those injuries usually designate you dieing. And even a skipping stone can kill you with a lucky roll.

I wouldn’t use the word “realistic”. Though I’m not adverse to using that term in relation to RPGs. If someone asked me for a “more realistic” RPG, I’d probably point them towards GURPS or Hârnmaster rather than RM.

4) "Magic" is in three categories: Arcane, Mentalist, and Channeling.

As I recall it was less about which category you fell into as much as which spell lists you got. There’s a lot of variety in the RM spell lists. Especially with the Companions. It can also be nice that lists mean that your spells tend to follow themes.

Then again, maybe that’s because I always played Arcane casters, but I don’t remember for sure. (^_^)

5) You're just a vulnerable kitten without armor.

Of all the RPGs I’ve played, RM has come the closest to making the “agile warrior” as viable an option as the “armored warrior”.

Heck, a mage of mine with a rapier that got cornered did quite a remarkable job of defending himself despite his lack of armor. (Hmm...don’t remember why he couldn’t use magic in that situation.)

 

[Cirex]

I had totally forgotten about the invisible turtle.

My DM used to give us extra points for main skills (not combat related, but things like climb, swimming, thievery, etc.) and many for secondary skills (cooking, etc.). I don't recall the exact system, but a ranger usually had enough skill points to be a "skill-money".

The experience was kinda annoying. You had to write down the damage received (including criticals), the criticals done, etc.
I remember it was something like 5,10,15,20,25 (Critical A,B,C,D,E) x level of the enemy. This way you had to calculate the experience...

Tiresome, but it was my beginning as "serious" RPer, so I can just love the entire thing.

 

[Rechan]

Should I show this thread to the GM?