Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9145371" data-attributes="member: 42582">The two that I know best are Rolemaster (I've GMed thousands of hours) and RuneQuest (my experience is considerably less than RM, but not trivial).They differ in a couple of significant ways:*In melee combat, in RM a player can allocate their skill bonus between attack and defence, thus choosing how much risk to take. In RQ attack and defence are separate skills, rolled separately. So RM melee combat is amenable to a player injecting their sense of &quot;stakes&quot; in a way that RQ is not.

*If you use a fairly standard option for spellcasting in RM, namely, overcasting and thus generating an ESF (Extraordinary Spell Failure) roll, then again players have an opportunity to inject their sense of &quot;stakes&quot; by deciding how much to risk when casting a spell.

*If you use Adrenal Moves in RM, then martial characters have a spell-like ability that can be rolled for. And if you use the option for sustaining Adrenal Moves with an increasingly harder roll, then again players can inject their sense of &quot;stakes&quot; by deciding how hard to push their luck.There is no analogue of the above in RM missile combat, which is much closer to RQ.A second difference is that, in RM, a player can choose the direction of their PC's development (by allocating Development Points), whereas in RQ this is harder (you can seek out training, but that has a strong in-fiction dimension to it).RQ is thus more &quot;austere&quot; than RM.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9145371, member: 42582"] The two that I know best are Rolemaster (I've GMed thousands of hours) and RuneQuest (my experience is considerably less than RM, but not trivial). They differ in a couple of significant ways: [indent]*In melee combat, in RM a player can allocate their skill bonus between attack and defence, thus choosing how much risk to take. In RQ attack and defence are separate skills, rolled separately. So RM melee combat is amenable to a player injecting their sense of "stakes" in a way that RQ is not. *If you use a fairly standard option for spellcasting in RM, namely, overcasting and thus generating an ESF (Extraordinary Spell Failure) roll, then again players have an opportunity to inject their sense of "stakes" by deciding how much to risk when casting a spell. *If you use Adrenal Moves in RM, then martial characters have a spell-like ability that can be rolled for. And if you use the option for sustaining Adrenal Moves with an increasingly harder roll, then again players can inject their sense of "stakes" by deciding how hard to push their luck.[/indent] There is no analogue of the above in RM missile combat, which is much closer to RQ. A second difference is that, in RM, a player can choose the direction of their PC's development (by allocating Development Points), whereas in RQ this is harder (you can seek out training, but that has a strong in-fiction dimension to it). RQ is thus more "austere" than RM. [/QUOTE]

Verification