I Am For The Darkmaster, Actually

In my misspent gaming youth, there was a game that the other members of my gaming group spoke of in strange, hushed tones. A game where you rolled on chart after chart after chart during battles. Where critical hits were described in gory, R-rated detail. Where character creation took hours and characters could die in seconds. This game was called Rolemaster. Whether or not Rolemaster lived...

slide01_famed_desktop-2048x1320.jpg


In my misspent gaming youth, there was a game that the other members of my gaming group spoke of in strange, hushed tones. A game where you rolled on chart after chart after chart during battles. Where critical hits were described in gory, R-rated detail. Where character creation took hours and characters could die in seconds. This game was called Rolemaster.

Whether or not Rolemaster lived up to the hype of those 8th grade memories, I can’t say. But I can talk about Against The Darkmaster, an OSR-style revamping of the rules from lead designer Massimiliano Carachristi. It may seem weird playing a product that’s built on nostalgia for a game that I’ve never played, but good OSR designs stand on their own without the need for nostalgia to carry them. Nostalgia, at best, is meant to flavor a design and smooth over a rough patch or two. How does this game fare without me fondly remembering the charts of my youth? Let’s look at the copy provided by Open Ended Games.

The book is a 570+ page tome with a full-color cover and crisp black and white line drawings in the interior. Art director Tomasso Galmacci is also listed as one of the interior artists and he nails the classic look of an 80’s rulebook. The work here reminds me of the sharp art in Forbidden Lands with some great full page pieces breaking up the chapters. Layout is kept to a simple two columns with scroll-like sidebars breaking in the text. It’s here where Against The Darkmaster starts to tip its hand that it’s not going to be a simple reprint of Rolemaster. Many of the sidebars scattered through the text offer rules hacks and tweaks with ideas that modernize the rules. I love it when designers offer these options in a rulebook.

The system starts out simple enough. Roll percentile dice, add them to a skill percentage and if they get 100 or over, the character succeeds. Roll over 175, and that’s a critical success. The success chart also suggests other modern elements, such as a success with a cost for a roll between 75-99 or a critical failure of 5 or below. Players can climb these heights (or fall into the mathematical pits of despair) because the percentile rolls are open ended. 95 or higher means the players roll again and add, while 05 or lower means the players roll again and subtract.

Combat and magic are where the charts start to truly make their appearance. Combat rounds are structured so that magic and ranged attacks sandwich melee action in a round. That allows for some weapon strategy too, as the longer the melee weapon is, the earlier it goes during the melee section. Instead of the base 100 target number weapons are rolled on a chart determined by their type of damage with each of the four armor types on the chart. If the roll is high enough, a second roll occurs on a critical hit chart also determined by the type of weapon. That’s where a short description of a nasty injury lives, along with some long term effects of the injury like a torn tendon or bleeding hit points each round. It also helps in the modern era for those with the PDF to print out any relevant charts and have them handy for each player’s damage.

Magic’s complexity comes in its versatility. The majority of the classes come with some level of inborn magic talent, with any classes having access to spell knowledge by trading in skill levels on a two for one basis. Multiple rolls for a single action slow down game play, but it doesn’t do so much more than separately rolling to hit and damage. There are magic points and modifier charts, but the real cost of magic is that if a magic user does too well, they run the risk of revealing the heroes to the Darkmaster and getting some supernatural goons sent to take out the good guys.

The Darkmaster is the main villain of the campaign created by the GM as a stand-in for them in the world. Rolemaster was related to Middle-Earth Role Playing and this element offers a chance to let the Game Master let their inner Sauron fly by taunting the PCs or sending some monsters to attack the party. It’s a fun riff on the wandering monsters concept and for those who might not have a fantasy villain in mind at the start of a campaign, the book offers a few charts for inspiration, as well as some sample villains and minions lavishly illustrated in some of my favorite art in the book. Creating a Darkmaster feels like a middle ground between the antagonistic play of early RPGs and the collaborative play of modern designs.

The Darkmaster creation is of the modern ideas incorporated into character creation, such as drives that come off as aspect-like ideas that encourage players to get into trouble to score advancement points. Players also get background elements that work a little like feats while also tying into drives and shared world creation. A character that has an Assassin training background is encouraged to make their relationship with their guild as a drive and the GM is encouraged to build the details of that guild together. While Against The Darkmaster is built by a team that loves the original game, it plays like the version of the game I would run: keep the stuff I like, add in stuff that fits my style.

If I wanted to run a game that felt like the weird, dark 80s fantasy of things like Dragonslayer or Willow, this is the game I would use. It’s heavier than my usual fantasy RPG choices, but sometimes you just have to play a game where you high five everyone at the table when you deliver a gnarly blow to the kneecap of the vampire king the Darkmaster sent to kill you.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Rob Wieland

Rob Wieland

Banesfinger

Explorer
We tried to keep them relatively rare, but there's a few. For example, the first 10 ranks in a skill give you +5/rank, 11 to 20 is +2/rank, 21+ gets you a meager +1/rank.
Our group has converted everything to d20 (divide by 5). We've converted all the tables, modifiers, weapon charts, etc.
Why?
We have both: new players (who would be overwhelmed by the math) and many who are migrating from D&D so that made switching systems a little easier to 'sell' to them.

I've attached a file to show how we dealt with the diminished rank bonus.
 

Attachments

  • Skill Ranks.jpg
    Skill Ranks.jpg
    26.8 KB · Views: 52

log in or register to remove this ad

CapnZapp

Legend
Writing this in 2023, after playtesting Against the Darkmaster or "vsD" for ~10 sessions.

First, let's set expectations. This is basically MERP. And no other game. It is not RoleMaster and it is not HARP.

In some cases, vsD is (thankfully) much streamlined compared to MERP. In others, vsD ignores pretty much all of the rpg crafting improvements made since the dawn of the hobby (MERP celebrates its fortieth anniversary next year).

That means some things are decidedly out of fashion. Everything about vsD pretty much takes the standard party of Fighter, Thief, Wizard, Cleric (or Warrior, Rogue, Wizard, Animist) for granted. The idea that you might end up with players where nobody decides to create a Rogue, or a Wizard, or an Animist just doesn't seem to have entered the minds of its creators. For a 1984 game that would have been excusable. In 2023 however...

The "niche protection" is strong with this one. This isn't a game where others can multiclass to cover up a lack of a main role. If an item only works for an Animist, and you don't have one, you're sold out of luck. If even the introductory scenario features -50 locks, you know its writers expected one character to minmax the Locks and Traps skill. And so on. You are basically guaranteed to end up with a character that has huge holes in their abilities, much like AD&D heroes of old. (Unless you're playing an Elf, perhaps)

As discussed by previous posts, this is a game where you make all major character build decisions at character creation. Leveling up just means getting better at what you're good at. There is no notion of suddenly gaining a new ability at a playable degree of competence - all you can do is stop putting points in what you're good at in order to put points into what you suck at, and maybe five levels later you're middling at both things. Again, contrasted to the AD&D of 1984, this makes the MERP/RM system look good. Contrasted to modern games played in the 2020s, not so much.

MERP was designed before Initiative systems became the norm, and features an outright strange solution for determining who acts first. HARP wisely eschewed this mind-boggling solution for a reasonably normal initiative system. Sadly, vsD goes all in on the MERP compatibility here, and uses a "Tactical Round Sequence" that offers no advantages over initiative while needlessly creating many questions. At first blush, you think you perform each phase in order, but not so fast! See, anytime this rigid and inflexible structure makes no sense, you're instructed to have the two combatants make an Opposed check to see who acts first.

Not only is this system fantastically complicated and out of date, it also introduces a truckload of complications and the prospects of analysis paralysis is overwhelming. There is a reason initiative became popular. The GM isn't continuously asked to deliver judgement calls. The ability to make decisions and then immediately act upon them (when it is your turn in D&D you simply do your turn) makes combat much faster and much simpler. In vsD you're supposed to first declare your action, remember your choice, and only later perform it. You're also supposed to choose an action without knowing if it will be rendered moot by the time you get to act. With the TRS system, I wouldn't be surprised if you got deadlocks like A acting faster than B acting faster than C acting faster than A...

For a complicated wargame like Advanced Squid Leader this might make some sense, but for a fantasy roleplaying game? While old MERP players will obviously take to vsD as fish to water, I seriously doubt that just because you're interested in high fantasy or Tolkien-inspired campaigns, you want to spend that much brain-power on just killing some Orcs. VsD fails to realize much of its potential customer base comes from D&D 5 players who will definitely not take to the "Tactical Round Sequence" easily, and the game offers no other explanation for its byzantine combat system other than "MERP was our inspiration".

However. VsD cleans up and simplifies MERP in countless ways, so that argument fails. HARP had already proved d100 games could use a sane initiative system. Anyway, if you do look at MERP, you realize that vsD improves it in almost every way - except the core combat engine, which makes that all the more unfortunate.

One aspect that does not come across as modern is vsD's take on races. Yes, the game does avoids that term (calling the options "Kin"), but still - some Kins are simply better than others. While this makes sense for a MERP game pitting prof. Tolkien's Elves and High Men against garbage races like Men and Orcs, there isn't even a sidebar discussing how to even out the racial choices.

Another choice that makes more sense for a Tolkien campaign specifically, than more general fantasy gaming, is the absence of gold and money. VsD features a simple wealth system, anticipating games where heroes just aren't motivated by money. Have just one Noble in your party, and economic issues chiefly just evaporate. This makes the game difficult to use for anything else than "save the world" type scenarios.

Another design decision worth mentioning is how you basically aren't allowed to recover wounds and injury unless you retreat to a "Safe Haven" - the Rivendells, Lothloriens, and Minas Tirithes of your campaign world. If this makes you react "what? but having an easy Über over to Rivendell isn't always possible! Doesn't this effectively make the game unplayable?" you are completely correct. Even the introductory adventure suggests the completely generic little starting village be deemed a Safe Haven. While this does allow gameplay to actually work, I would consider this to seriously devaluing the concept of a "Safe Haven" as described by the rule book: "Safe Havens are a beacon of light in the wilderness, houses of healing, and bastions against the forces of the Darkmaster."

A more personal reflection is that I absolutely loved the way herblore played an integral part of MERP. Sadly, the vsD designers don't share this love, and herbs are been reduced to generic blandness.

Some people think the XP system warrants praise. I do understand the sentiment, but I'm afraid that all the effort that went into tying your Passions to xp gain is wasted, when you have played rpgs for so long that you have realized xp systems are mostly just useless and needless. (The only xp system I have needed for the past 15 years is "the heroes level up when I say so".) I would have found it MUCH more useful if the Passions were connected to Drive points instead, for instance.

Good stuff with vsD includes
  • general art direction. I like the clean simple black-n-white old-skool design
  • a good Bestiary with a decent selection of core monsters
  • lots of little simplifications of MERP concepts
  • Drive points is a surprisingly simple and playable implementation of the "action points" mechanic

All this boils down to: instead of using MERP, absolutely do use Against the Darkness. But this is not a game trying hard to win over new devotees; this is mainly a game that allows old MERP hands to keep playing in the style they're accustomed to, without a lot of the clutter that plagued ICE's old old games. For some, that's good enough.

If you aren't interested in the MERP trappings, I would still say HARP is the more newcomer friendly option for d100 gaming, even though that isn't saying much: To be honest, there really haven't been any revolutionary progress for this system, and d100 remains weighed down by decisions made decades ago. Neither HARP nor vsD truly brings d100 into the new millenium. In that, a good comparison might be Traveller; another game where anybody interested in actual reinvention simply leaves the community, while the games themselves continue to fossilize.

This is not a game I expect to usher in a new age of d100 gaming. I don't see many D&D gamers choosing this game over other much more enticing and less baffling options that are out there in the 2020s.

Maybe if there's ever a second edition tearing out the Tactical Round Sequence and finally having d100 offer meaningful character build options at every level, not just the first...
 

aramis erak

Legend
Yes, and personally, I think another factor was that the edition of Rolemaster that released earlier in the 90s (RMSS) made some changes to the system that not everyone liked. That's why the new edition is called 'Unified' -- it's trying to take the best of both worlds (RM2 and RMSS) and give it modern support.
RM is way too late doing so for me to consider. My player base all have dim views of RM, and on top of that, the pricing for the core for something I'm unlikely to get to table, even with my online group?
Not happening. Tho' I will note: Spacemaster 1e was the 3rd RPG I owned a copy of. I have a deep and abiding nostalgia for it. But it's not hitting the table anytime soon, if ever, and I just can't justify putting the mathpile in front of them.

At the end of the day, even considering the hours of fun reading and scheming, None of my RM books have paid off at even $1 per hour per person, which was the rate at the arcade for my favorite games... (most of my arcade time was more like $2-$3 per hour, but that handful I could play well, 10-15 minutes of play on a $0.20 token)

I might sneak in Navigator, which openly admits to riffing nostalgia for SM 1E... but they're more likely to enjoy Alien. It's definitely not a pure clone of SM, it's got changes aplenty. And I have no bloody clue how it wound up in my DTRPG inventory, but it did. Probably a bundle. It, like Against the Darkmaster, is a simplification while retaining some elements; almost heartbreakerish.
Navigator does mention Lines, Veils, and the X Card. It uses 4 armor types, not 20. It has an appendix with solo/gm-less play tools, and some of those are suitable for GM use, too (Clocks, Oracles, Fail Forward)
We tried to keep them relatively rare, but there's a few. For example, the first 10 ranks in a skill give you +5/rank, 11 to 20 is +2/rank, 21+ gets you a meager +1/rank.
Which is the best reason for it; the ranks all matter in a d100 roll, but a faithful d20 adaptation will result in rounding issues at higher levels of skill.

RM/SM/MERP/Cyberspace/HARP all had reasons for that fidelity; RM & SM had options for smoothed modifiers.
Writing this in 2023, after playtesting Against the Darkmaster or "vsD" for ~10 sessions.
Snipping the excellent details to ask the fundamental question:
Is the group enjoying it?
 

Hurin70

Adventurer
RM is way too late doing so for me to consider. My player base all have dim views of RM, and on top of that, the pricing for the core for something I'm unlikely to get to table, even with my online group?
Not happening.

Fair enough. Sounds like RMU is not for you.

Just wanted to note for anyone interested that RMU Core Law is now available in print, and Spell Law has been released in PDF. Next up is Treasure Law, though probably not for a few months.

Also, the Electronic Roleplaying Assistant (which can be used to make characters track other aspects of the game) now has an RMU module, and work is proceeding on a Roll20 character sheet for RMU as well as an updated version of the Combat Minion.

They're all available by DriveThruRpg.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
Snipping the excellent details to ask the fundamental question:
Is the group enjoying it?
I believe its too early to tell. About the only feedback I've gotten so far is "these rules actually work", which refers to most of my players having a much harder time with the chaotic and random nature of DCC, which I adored for many reasons they are indifferent to.

Important Note: for my campaign I have ditched the Tactical Round Sequence, instead using a straight-forward Initiative system (attached). Mentioning this because the way you govern the action sequence is arguably the core of an entire game...
 

Attachments

  • vsD_Initiative.pdf
    107.1 KB · Views: 47

CapnZapp

Legend
Fair enough. Sounds like RMU is not for you.
The problem with this is that if you aren't evolving, you're dying.

While you might consider d100 fine as is, it really isn't - if you want the games to attract new players.

The civil war among RoleMaster fans is the perfect example of an ever-shrinking circle of fanatics - that prefer to back-stab each other instead of realizing the circle keeps shrinking...

Squabbling over what to include in any "unified" edition completely misses the basic fact that the entire game needs to evolve. I have pointed out some core shortcomings (above) that no d100 fan appears able to even realize is preventing the game from growing.

I don't know any details about this "unified" edition, but I would bet actual money it won't solve any of d100's real problems.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
Which is the best reason for it; the ranks all matter in a d100 roll, but a faithful d20 adaptation will result in rounding issues at higher levels of skill.
Actually the best reason is that the d20 should be reserved for D&D only.

Every other game I play and like have other dice. Using d20 for d100 or other percentage games (such as Warhammer FRP or Chaosium's BRP) would feel cheap and simplistic.

:)
 

Hurin70

Adventurer
The problem with this is that if you aren't evolving, you're dying.

While you might consider d100 fine as is, it really isn't - if you want the games to attract new players.

The civil war among RoleMaster fans is the perfect example of an ever-shrinking circle of fanatics - that prefer to back-stab each other instead of realizing the circle keeps shrinking...

Squabbling over what to include in any "unified" edition completely misses the basic fact that the entire game needs to evolve. I have pointed out some core shortcomings (above) that no d100 fan appears able to even realize is preventing the game from growing.

I don't know any details about this "unified" edition, but I would bet actual money it won't solve any of d100's real problems.

Well, if you dont' know any of the details of the new Rolemaster edition, I would encourage you to familiarize yourself with the system first. How can you say it doesn't solve any of the problems if you don't know what its solutions are?

I think RMU has done a very good job of addressing the difficulties in earlier editions of the Rolemaster. It has eliminated several charts where they can be removed with no loss of fucntionality: for example, you don't need a Base Spell Attack Chart nor a Resistance Roll chart anymore; instead, the sum total of the caster's Spell Casting Roll becomes the number the target needs to resist the spell. There has been a conscious attempt to eliminate charts when they are not needed.

I would also say that the edition wars for Rolemaster were never quite as bad as those between say 3.5/4e/5e D&D, and the Rolemaster community, albeit small, seems to be getting along quite well.
 

aramis erak

Legend
I would also say that the edition wars for Rolemaster were never quite as bad as those between say 3.5/4e/5e D&D, and the Rolemaster community, albeit small, seems to be getting along quite well.
Rolemaster didn't so much have edition wars as PR problems.

Oh, and lacked a clear labeling scheme. Not to mention the relayouts of 1e. At least 3 sets of trade dress. Plus RMSS.
 

Topramesk

Explorer
Another design decision worth mentioning is how you basically aren't allowed to recover wounds and injury unless you retreat to a "Safe Haven" - the Rivendells, Lothloriens, and Minas Tirithes of your campaign world. If this makes you react "what? but having an easy Über over to Rivendell isn't always possible! Doesn't this effectively make the game unplayable?" you are completely correct. Even the introductory adventure suggests the completely generic little starting village be deemed a Safe Haven. While this does allow gameplay to actually work, I would consider this to seriously devaluing the concept of a "Safe Haven" as described by the rule book: "Safe Havens are a beacon of light in the wilderness, houses of healing, and bastions against the forces of the Darkmaster."

You can actually heal your wound in any safe environment (like the village in the starting adventure), not just Safe Havens. Even out in the wilderness you can use the Camping rules to rest and heal. Safe Havens allows you to heal quicker (see page 158), perform special activities, and generally have a unique feature you create while generating them.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top