Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steel_Wind" data-source="post: 3016476" data-attributes="member: 20741">Our gaming circle played RM before there was an RM - all the way until when 3.0 was released. About 18 years.We didn't like RMSS very much and were happy to make the jump back to 3.x. It had been a LONG time for us with ICE and virtually every one of us had left 1st edition and had sat out 2nd edition in its entirety.  We were not fans of AD&D at the time.The bankruptcy of ICE and lack of product sort of stalled our group and we were ready (aye, ready!) to jump to 3.0.Recently there's been some suggestion of switching one of the weekly games back to RM2 for a bit.  No real good reason - just looking for a change of pace.I won't be switching from my 3.5 to RM for a while though. I am an enjoying 3.5 too much right now.RM, for all the chartmaster bashing, is a pretty damn good system once you get to know it.  When you understand the rules and the charts and everyone at the table knows the system well - combat can still fly relatively quickly.I would not go back to RMSS for anything though.  Character generation was just so complex to the point of being broken.  Killing a character was akin to sentencing someone to character generation hell for three hours. Screw that.Back in 2000, when people who LIKE complexity and have been playing the system for about 18 years (since before it was even published as a system) were complaining about the complexity...you've got a pretty serious problem on your hands. RMSS was horrible.RM2, however, mostly rocked and Monte Cook's influence from RM2 can be seen in 3.x all over the place.</blockquote>

Verification