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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 4402385" data-attributes="member: 3608">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”Yep. It’s “the d% system” instead of the d20 system™.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.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.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. (^_^)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.)</blockquote>

Verification