Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4401811" data-attributes="member: 42582">I agree that this is an issue. The solution recommended for RM2 is to award an extra 50% of DPs. I do the same thing in RMSS.Because of the double-development cap, extra DPs won't lead to overpowered characters, just ones with an adequate breadth of skills.I don't agree that this is such a big issue. Bonuses to attack spells are available for range (+10 at 10', +30 if touching) and the target making its RR is penalisd for wounds it has taken. In general, RM casters are fairly strong.This is true. I used photocopies of the rules organised in plastic pocket folders. To an extent. Most GMs rationalise or adjust the skill system in some fashion. RMC 2 probably has the definitive skill system for RM. RMC 6 also has a good version of the skill system.Self-healing can help here - it is available to several professions. My group has often not had a healer, but we tend to play urban-based campaigns where NPC healers are easily available. Getting stuck in the wilderness with no healing can suck a bit.I agree with all this.One important difference between RM and RQ is that in RM parry and attack are based off the same skill, with the player choosing the distribution between the two from round to round. This gives combat a degree of dynamism and tactical choice that RQ combat lacks (and is one of the strengths of RM as a system).It's not as bad as it sounds, I don't think. But as I said in my earlier post, if the GM tries to pack in as much "filler" as is typical for a D&D adventure (eg more-or-less pointless encounters with giant rats at the entrance to the dungeon) then the game will probably drag.I think HARP is probably a better game. But it has some features that will make it play a bit differently from RM, especially (i) no development cap per level with a tarrif on rapid development (ie it is more like 3E D&D skill point rules) which means that specialisation by PCs is mechanically favoured - whereas RM tends to encourage breadth, because of the double development rules; (ii) casting penalties for high level spells in HARP, making low level spells more attractive - whereas in RM it's almost always best to lead with ones best spell.</blockquote>

Verification