Firehawk Games
Other RPGs => Other Game Systems => Topic started by: imported_Witchking20k on January 13, 2011, 06:23:25 PM
-
Ironically enough, they have already started in on the RM revision discussions in the ICE forums. Same old story; "what do you mean its hard? You're obviously inferior..." Ok so that is a little harsh, but really, thats what it all comes down to. The purists are going to stand high aloft on their soap boxes and tell the rest of the folks how it should be done; then refuse to buy a new product.
It will be interesting to see if they decide to keep supporting both RMSS & RMC or can finally severe the tie to one or the other....
-
Well, discussions about a new edition have been going on for a long time and imho they were bound to resurface short after the "new ICE" announcement.
To tell the truth, I'd like to see a new edition of RM, but the "new ICE" seems too concerned about keeping happy the old fans (all of them simultaneously... lol) and maintaining a "RM purity" to actually change somtehing.
-
To tell the truth, I'd like to see a new edition of RM,
Well, you are one of the few people who can actually get something very much like it (http:///bigsmile.gif)
-
Ehe, you're right!
-
I'd like to see a new version too. I'm not one to wish ill upon anyone. So, I hope they make some good choices based on the market; not just their own personal beliefs.
-
On another front, I think Blacky The Blackball (the guy that did the retro-clone of the D&D Rules Cyclopedia called "Dark Dungeons") is working on a game called "Blood, Guts, & Glory" that aims to blend the OGL of 3rd Edition D&D with a certain other game...
-
That would be really cool, I thought of writing something like that myself a lot of times!
-
Well, I guess you have to be real careful with that, the IP owners for RM seem to be pretty protective of their IP.
-
The purists are going to stand high aloft on their soap boxes and tell the rest of the folks how it should be done; then refuse to buy a new product.
It will be interesting to see if they decide to keep supporting both RMSS & RMC or can finally severe the tie to one or the other....
but the "new ICE" seems too concerned about keeping happy the old fans (all of them simultaneously... lol) and maintaining a "RM purity" to actually change somtehing.
Currently you are just guessing, based on the (seemingly) bad assumptions you have about the new ICE. IMO it is much too early to tell whether the discussion will go into the direction that you assume. Let's see what the future brings.
-
Well, I guess you have to be real careful with that, the IP owners for RM seem to be pretty protective of their IP.
He was pretty careful when he did the Dark Dungeons game, so I'm sure he will be just as careful now. I sent him a PM on RPG.net and he is indeed still working on it. (http:///smile.gif)
-
Currently you are just guessing, based on the (seemingly) bad assumptions you have about the new ICE. IMO it is much too early to tell whether the discussion
will go into the direction that you assume. Let's see what the future brings.
Looking at how revision discussions on the ICE forums have gone before, I think Witchking's assessment is pretty much spot on, the interesting part will be to see how the new crew will react to the edition war that seems to be the unavoidable result of any revision discussion on RM.
To that I am happy to wait and see.
I would just like to add that the new business model allows for them just to keep the books in print (on demand) and publish whatever they please, whenever they please, since they have almost now running costs to cover. I'm not saying that is what they are going to do, just pointing out that they could do this, if they want and just put off any revision indefinitely.
-
Yah, the assumptions are probaby bad, and obviously an opinion. But, we've all been through the edition war before, so I think that part is at least factual. I have fallowed the discussion closely (as I think most of us have), and anticipate it hitting the same loop it always does......what do you call that when you hit a never ending loop....a never ending loop...a never ending loop.....
-
Ecthelion: yes, my are just assumption, based on the posts I've read on the ice forums. I don't think those discussions are going anywhere, probably there's much more going on in the background, but of that I know nothing andI can only guess basing my ideas on what I can read (http:///wink.gif)
-
On a simlar note.....has anyone seen what the difference between 5th & 6th edition hero is? Through all the talk of simplifying games etc.....Hero is a beast of system.
-
Looks like the project is back in the works.
http://bloodgutsandglory.wordpress.com/
-
Hi all,
Ive been going nuts(silently) over the posts of "we need a new RM"... "no we dont"... "Yes but it needs to be EXACTLY like the old version, including the ;layout and art as its perfect", "yes but the RMSS" "yes but RMC".....
Ive given up on anything ICE... I'll keep playing HARP as I got my group onto it and we are stil into it (one hard core DnD'er is going to have a shot as a GM so we arent going to throw a curveball at him like switching systems.... (http:///smile.gif)
-
I don't see a new RM coming out unless the guys at ICE get their shit together. I doubt I'll play a new version as I'm happy with RM2/C & RMx. Unless it keeps what I like about RM2/C/X but can make it abit smoother getting magic lists or spells I'll not play it. I'd rather give Novus a try or use Castle & Crusades or Pathfinder RPG (with tweeks) , a retro-clone or RMx as a GM or player.
-
I own a lot of ICE product. And still love some of the core concepts of RM & Shadow World. But, I have found the line a bit stale in the last few years. I felt RMX was a step in the right direction; and eagerly purcahased everything released in a "vote with your dollar" belief. But, I think its obvious that RMX will be abandoned; or refitted to the new ICEs taste. Fair enough. I owned and operated a small business for 11 years. I made plenty of decisions based on emotion; so, I can identify with the idea of moulding something into your own vision.
The gaming industry as a whole has changed so dramatically. I often wonder if they are paying attention to it at all?
-
Hi all, first post here (http:///smile.gif)
-
Your English was perfect from my perspective. French Canadian?
-
On another front, I think Blacky The Blackball (the guy that did the retro-clone of the D&D Rules Cyclopedia called "Dark Dungeons") is working on a game called "Blood, Guts, & Glory" that aims to blend the OGL of 3rd Edition D&D with a certain other game...
I suggest checking out Darkest Dungeons - http://www.gratisgames.webspace.virginmedia.com/ - which I think that any RM fan will find interesting...
-
That's good to know, since I noticed Blood, Guts, & Glory sort of disappeared.
-
From my understanding, he kind of gave up on it for a while and then decided to incorporate most of it into this...
-
http://www.ironcrown.com/?p=1872
-
I saw (somebody else directed my attention to it -- but that is okay since I already posted about it on my personal website about 2 months ago), and only shake my head.....
GCP got possession of HARP SF in Dec. 09. It took them until January 2011 to release it - with no appreciable changes to the contents, that was simply pagemaking...
They have had the ICE license since October of 2010, and have not released a single new product since then. (HARP SF had previously been released by Mjolnir, so it cannot count as new). HARP has supposedly been getting "tweaked" (as they called it, I called it what it really is - a revision) since they took over, and only just recently "went to pagemaking". Considering that it took over a year for the last product "sent to pagemaking" to get released, I have no expectations of it being released soon.
Last July/August, Thom announced that they would soon be updating the ICE website and forums -- nothing accomplished there yet either. In fact, the only thing accomplished regarding the website is that they butchered the layout that I had so painstakingly worked on building prior to Mjolnir losing the ICE license.
Mark Rosen (aka Lordmiller) is in charge of the RM revision. And while he is good at organizing things, he (IMO) is not and should not be a writer, and most definitely should never be designing/revising a system. As I have had somebody confide in me, he refuses to see any viewpoint but his own, and apparently thinks that he knows everything about RM....
In short, I feel sorry for the RM fans and what they are about to go through...
-
and here is a thread on rpg.net talking about it...
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?633527-Rolemaster-New-edition-announced!
-
And this morning, John Seal registered on the rpg.net forums to post (apparently to discredit the mildly disparaging posts I had made). They would have done better to simply ignore me....
-
I read through the thread... ouch. hehe.
-
Sometimes, I think that he is his own worst enemy. I find it extremely telling that neither Nick nor Thom, who both already have accounts on rpg.net, posted in the thread. That they had to get Seal to register to try and discredit me, which only gave my comments more weight.
I find it hilarious that none of them wish to confront me in a conversation in a location where we would be treated equally...
-
With all due respect, I find it more problematic that no one really took notice of what you had to say about the revision you did and the way the people now in charge of ICE went about facilitating that change ofaffairs. I am afraid it is partly due to the way you came over as very angry in the thread. This bothers me since I believe that these things should be known to the RM fans.
Apart from that I will just wait and see what comes out of the whole revision thing. I have several editions of RM, from very complex to pretty simple and streamlined, so the new one would have to be impressive to win me over, something I do not expect from the people who are now in charge of the revision.
-
I can honestly say, I don't care about this revision. If it were 1 book I might consider buying it. But, 5 books for a game that as a 35 year old I am going to play 1-2 times a month.....really?
-
Apparently, they believe that starting with a massive core and then stripping things out is the way to go. Unfortunately, with their organization, a new RMX-like product likely won't be released until 2014 or 2015 at least, by which point, the system will actually be dead, just zombie-ing along
Every single trend in the rpg market since 2000 has been towards simpler core, easier buy-in. They are going the opposite route. They will have a small uptick in sales when it is first released, then it will likely die as folks find out that it has actually become MORE complicated in some areas.....
I mourn for Rolemaster....
-
Sad but probably true...
-
I think one of the biggest factors in whether the new ICE will be successful or not will be in support material. If they don't release interesting campaign settings and adventures to support them, then I think you are right, there will be an initial set of sales from people like me who will buy the core books to see what the system is like, but if no support follows, that will quickly die off and things will go nowhere.
-
I think one of the biggest factors in whether the new ICE will be successful or not will be in support material. If they don't release interesting campaign settings and adventures to support them, then I think you are right, there will be an initial set of sales from people like me who will buy the core books to see what the system is like, but if no support follows, that will quickly die off and things will go nowhere.
And they won't be able to do it. Their track record of releases to date SHOWS that they won't be able to do it.
-
I think one of the biggest factors in whether the new ICE will be successful or not will be in support material. If they don't release interesting campaign settings and adventures to support them, then I think you are right, there will be an initial set of sales from people like me who will buy the core books to see what the system is like, but if no support follows, that will quickly die off and things will go nowhere.
And they won't be able to do it. Their track record of releases to date SHOWS that they won't be able to do it.
I think you are correct. At a minimum I think they would need to come out with something like the Guild Adventurer at least quarterly and I just don't think they have the manpower to do it. I hope for the Fan's sake that the new revision is decent, and I'm looking forward to seeing it, but I'm not getting my expectations up too high.
-
I think you are correct. At a minimum I think they would need to come out with something like the Guild Adventurer at least quarterly and I just don't think they have the manpower to do it. I hope for the Fan's sake that the new revision is decent, and I'm looking forward to seeing it, but I'm not getting my expectations up too high.
From what I have heard, Lordmiller did not endear himself to the rest of the team, and that he actually made some parts MORE complicated overall -- and that is likely to turn folks off as well...
-
More complicated is definitely not what is needed. But, could mean some room for doing some Optional Rules articles for the Guild Companion (http:///bigwink.gif)
-
If they ever actually get it released.... let alone, released in a timely fashion...
I am still not convinced that can do THAT...
-
Well, apparently the playtest is on and interested people can download the documents from the forum. I haven't done so yet, but I might do so some time in the future.
-
Yeah, I saw the announcement. You MUST be registered on their forums (something I won't do) to download the files...
-
Well, their "Playtest Aggreement" is much more daunting than the NDA old ICE used. And if I understand it correctly, everyone in a group of players needs to download their own copy of the document. Why this is so important to them I don't know.
I downloaded Character Law and Spell Law but haven't had a look at them so far.
-
I had a quick look at character law yesterday evening. So far, I like it very much. I feel they have found a good balance between RMSS and RMC. There is at least one thing I think should have disappeared: the level-based RR table. Why do they have to keep it in a game so resolutely skill-oriented ?
Lots of really good things though.
-
Well, their "Playtest Aggreement" is much more daunting than the NDA old ICE used. And if I understand it correctly, everyone in a group of players needs to download their own copy of the document. Why this is so important to them I don't know.
2 reasons mainly....
First -- This allows them to track WHO downloads the files (there is a mod on the ICE forums that allows the admins to see WHO views a given thread and how often and when the last time they viewed it was - I should know, I installed it back when I was the admin over there and was having so many problems with them).
Second -- it allows them to grow the forum membership (something that they haven't been able to do on their own so far) by requiring each person to download their own copy, they can point at the increased number of registrations as if that were proof that they are better than Mjolnir was.
-
Downloaded them but haven't read them yet. Just deciding if I want to print out hard copies or not. Might print out Character Law, but Spell Law is a bit too big, and most of it is just Spell Lists.
-
I have read character law, spell law and arms law.
The first I found to be a good product overall but it brings nothing really new, keeps the (IMHO) antediluvian level-based RR table rather than use skill versus skill contest.
I think the second is rather useless. It's just a streamlined version of RMSS spell law with only some small bits of innovation (ritual casting for example).
OTOH, Arms law is a very good product. They have addressed many perks of older versions and I especially like the renewal of armor types and the use of specialized skills to decrease situational maluses.
-
I have written reviews and put them on my personal website ( http://www.wizlair.net ) if you would like to read them.
To put it shortly, the power of directed spell (elemental) casters has been increased dramatically, and the power of casters who specialize in RR-based spells has been completely nerfed.
Here is something I recently wrote on the rpg.net forums..
Resistance Rolls -- The whole concept of the RR is that with all things being equal, and with a median casting roll, if the attacker and defender are the same level, then the defender has to roll 50 or better to make his RR. It was also based on the fact that the better your casting roll the better the Target Number (TN) for the RR, and the worse the roll, the worse the TN (from the attacker's viewpoint). The defender also had a number of potential modifiers that could aid his RR.
With the removal of the Base Attack Roll (BAR) table, there are no more modifiers on the attacker's side, so the starting TN from the RR table (which does not seem to have changed), remains the same, regardless of how good the roll is. However, the defender still gets all those potential modifiers. This essentially makes most RR-based spells useless, and effectively destroys the value of any profession that relies on RR-based spells (such as the Mentalist).
Bolt Spells -- One thing I noticed early on in reading the revision, is that each and every weapon must still be specialized. In prior versions of RM, the caster was required to specialize in each type of directed spell. Fire Bolts were different from Water Bolts and from Lightning Bolts from Strike spells, etc. Now, in this revision, the spell user can simply specialize in "Elemental Bolts" and use that bonus for all the different elemental bolts. So where non-spell-users have to specialize in each individual weapon, the Magician (and other spell users) only have to specialize in "Directed Spells: Elemental Bolts". That is a HUGE power boost for the Magician.
Combine this with how much MORE powerful the elemental attack tables are compared to prior versions, and the fact that Magicians get Combat Training Skills as Professional Skills, and it becomes obvious that there was a deliberate and strong move to increase the power of Magicians, and this this also works as another HUGE power boost for them.
-
Reading ICE forum this afternoon, I got the feeling that this play test is not very productive. Somehow, I feel the beta version is already almost a release candidate with not much room for further changes. I hope I am wrong in that.
Those forums are becoming caricature. Whatever anyone says, you will automatically find others to say the contrary and so on, ad nauseam...
This play test is IMO not as efficient as the one made for Novus: a bunch of play testers with an author to rule them all. They are lacking direction I think or maybe reviewers are being ignored by the author. I can't find many constructive criticisms or debates led by an author and then a decision to the discussions.
I guess we have to wait and see.
-
Reading ICE forum this afternoon, I got the feeling that this play test is not very productive. Somehow, I feel the beta version is already almost a release candidate with not much room for further changes. I hope I am wrong in that.
Unfortunately, it appears that Vroomfogle has publicly stated someplace that the manuscript was unlikely to be changed at all (somebody else reposted his comment on rpg.net). That it is essentially in almost final form.
Those forums are becoming caricature. Whatever anyone says, you will automatically find others to say the contrary and so on, ad nauseam...
This play test is IMO not as efficient as the one made for Novus: a bunch of play testers with an author to rule them all. They are lacking direction I think or maybe reviewers are being ignored by the author. I can't find many constructive criticisms or debates led by an author and then a decision to the discussions.
I guess we have to wait and see.
Their "playtest" isn't even a true playtest. A true playtest would be willing to change and adjust things that actual players, who do not play in the same style as the authors, find wrong with the system. But they refuse to even acknowledge that they might have problems with the system.
Essentially, they are basically treating everybody as idiots, and those fans ARE going to catch on, and are going to drop them like a hot potato. Like it or not, this revision is spelling the death of Rolemaster as any sort of seriously considered system.
-
I did have a few of my YouTube subscribers ask me about my opinion on the new revision, and I told them the truth, I'm not really interested in it. I'll never throw away my old RM stuff, but unless I run a 1-shot of it, or perhaps a mini-campaign I don't see myself ever really using them again. RM would have to go through a significant change for me to really consider it again. I did buy the RM Classic PDFs, but that was mainly because I only had RMSS stuff and was curious how the older edition would play with a bunch of optional rules that the playtesters and authors came up with. I gave them a skimming read, but I haven't done anything with them. Put it down to the fact that I like buying RPGs even if I don't have time to really read them over. hehe. I'm never one to wish a company to fail, but if they don't listen to their audience or the suggestions of playtesters then they are most likely digging their own grave.
Whenever I tell people about Novus I feel honored that some of my ideas made it into the final version. I just showed my playtest group the printed version of Novus that I have (POD) and they were really excited to see it in a physical RPG format. They were very impressed that Tim Dugger listened to our feedback and made changes accordingly, as it seems that is a rather rare thing these days...
-
Whenever I tell people about Novus I feel honored that some of my ideas made it into the final version. I just showed my playtest group the printed version of Novus that I have (POD) and they were really excited to see it in a physical RPG format. They were very impressed that Tim Dugger listened to our feedback and made changes accordingly, as it seems that is a rather rare thing these days...
I don't hold a monopoly on good ideas. I do have to think and consider how a single idea may impact other areas of the rules, but that is par for the course. Writing Novus was actually easy compared to all of the issues involved in revising RM that need to be covered
-
Starting out with a brand new RPG is probably easier than revising a system that has a following already.
-
Easier than revising a system that had such a diverse group of followers, where there were 2 separate versions that needed to be unified. Most Certainly...
A revision, any revision needs to accomplish 2 main goals to be successful......
1) It needs to be attractive to new players
2) It needs to be able to be attractive and able to support the same style(s) of play found in prior versions.
RMU succeeds at neither.
-
New to this Forum, but some may remember me from the ICE forums
From what I have seen at least some of the comments from reviewers and actual playtesters are being looked at by the new ICE, how closely can't say until they come out with the next Playtest version. Right now don't have any positive or negative hopes for the Rolemaster Revision just following along to see what they come up with. Generally HARP is more to my test because of the less complicated rules. It is easier to add complexity to a solid base then take complexity out.
-
New to this Forum, but some may remember me from the ICE forums
Welcome! And yes, I do remember you. (http:///bigsmile.gif)
From what I have seen at least some of the comments from reviewers and actual playtesters are being looked at by the new ICE, how closely can't say until they come out with the next Playtest version. Right now don't have any positive or negative hopes for the Rolemaster Revision just following along to see what they come up with.
No telling how long it might be until the next playtest version comes out. From my understanding, they intend on releasing the other 2 "core" books in playtest version as well, and haven't gotten around to that yet either.
Generally HARP is more to my test because of the less complicated rules. It is easier to add complexity to a solid base then take complexity out.
Then, I would definitely be interested in hearing your opinions of Novus (and if you haven't gotten a copy yet, you can always go back to the main FHG site, and peruse the Novus TOC, as all of the core rules can be found from that page), though you should likely start a new thread for that conversation. I love feedback, it is how I make things better in the future!!
-
Well supposedly there will be a Round 2 Beta document.
This would be good since there are some legitimate concerns with the current Beta.
Of course the big problem is a lot of the discussions on the issues are right on the edge of being a Flame War.
Happy things are nicer on this Forum.
Hopefully when Novus and FireHawk become long established they want fall into the pitfall of people having entrenched, inflexible opinions
-
You would think that they would finish releasing the "round 1" documents before they start on "round 2"....
If you want to read my opinions on the Beta, I suggest visiting my personal website ( http://www.wizlair.net ) as I won't repeat those opinions here.
As for the "edge of Flame War" comment, that sort of situation happened often when folks were discussing one version of RM over the other. It is going to continue in revision discussions because each "camp" wants the revision to look like their favorite version - and unfortunately, this revision will please neither version....
I spent a couple of years trying to figure out a way to try an keep both camps happy because one inflexible rule of doing a revision is that you WILL lose customers who stay with the old version. Therefore, your new version has to appeal to new customers as well.
Unfortunately, from what I saw, the revision won't appeal to many in either camp (which is why they are at odds with one another - as this is supposedly a "beta", both camps think that they can still influence the end result to be closer to what they want, so they argue for it strongly, which leads to the flame war mentality of trying to show how their version is better).
From what others have told me, they get the feeling that the first beta released was close to the what they intend to make the final version (i.e. don't expect many changes in "round 2"). And is truly the case, then they will cause more problems in the long run.
-
Of course the big problem is a lot of the discussions on the issues are right on the edge of being a Flame War.
Happy things are nicer on this Forum.
Hopefully when Novus and FireHawk become long established they want fall into the pitfall of people having entrenched, inflexible opinions
That's precisely why I don't take part in those forums any more. Too many peoples are too sure to know THE truth.
-
Just wanted to post as although this last message is from 2013....the revision is still ongoing....
-
have they made many changes since 2013?
-
I can honestly say I don't know. I stopped following and probably will not even bother with the new version of RM.
-
Can't say for sure but the available products are rather good-looking.
My concern is: after reading through them a few weeks ago, I got the distinct feeling of reading... RM. I was hoping for interesting twists or even new takes on things but was sorely disappointed. Many people have spent a lot of time and energy on this but I find it more of a RM classic revamped than a true new iteration of RM.
-
So they went from the first beta (which was even MORE complicated) to something more along the line of what I had been doing?
and it only took them 10 years so far.......
-
I think that's what you get when too many people have their hands on the steering wheel or you go for two irreconcilable or perceived as such goals (RM2 / RMSS).
RM express was probably a good move back then but my take on this is that the future of RM was... HARP! Same basic mechanics, simple and efficient rules, lots of room for adding details and depth.
-
The future of RM relies on a setting not a system IMO. Successful games in today's market can be played as a universal system but are usually written into a setting. Doing this writes the strengths and weaknesses of the system into the setting. If RMX was presented in a Conan-esque or Black Company style setting the low-magic/highly fatal combat balance would have sense and essentially attracted the type of player that wants that experience. The problem will always be that a D&Der will try RM expecting a similar experience. ICE should manage that expectation better IMO. Easiest way to do it: write a setting specific to the system and then let the needs of the setting guide your revision. Oh, and the end result for ICE - a product with IP that you can protect.
-
OK, so twelve years in and apparently the revision is still not done...
In fact, I just spent a few minutes looking through the second beta, and where are the attack and critical tables?
They seem to be missing (I won't go into how amateurish the PDF looks, not on these forums (will give it a deeper review on my personal site at some point).
-
I've given up on RMU. I can adapt MERP & RMX to anything that I want at this point, so, why bother with RMU? That is the divide that began with RM vs. RMSS/RMFRP. It will only be a wider gap if/when RMU is completed. IMO the resources allocated to RMU should have been used to create small adventures and support products for RM/RMFRP and expand the market for HARP.
-
even if there is no funds for expanding the market, there is no official presence anyplace BUT the ICE forums....
That is no way to expand the brand. At least when I worked for ICE, I had and kept a presence on other forums to help expand the brand.
-
I think anyone who was interested in expanding the brand hitched their wagon to Against the Darkmaster. LOL
-
I think anyone who was interested in expanding the brand hitched their wagon to Against the Darkmaster. LOL
Which is definitely 1 million times better than that monstrosity called RMU....
-
I think the more I play, the more I appreciate MERP and RMX. The streamlined presentation of the rules, re-playability, and approachability of these rulesets made them great stand alone games. I've said before: if RMX would have included a Ranger & Mentalist rather than an Animist plus used the ATs 5/13/17 as the base ATs for armor.it would have been a nearly perfect introduction to RM.
-
Ranger and Mentalist were given in the Express Additions. And it used MERP-like combat tables.
The RM Revision that I was working on had similar tables with an extra column of armor on it.
I had to dig it out to see.. I also dug out my RM Cyradon PDF file as well.
-
Yah- I was a part of those too. That RM revision was shaping up pretty well IMO. The armor & spell casting being more "heroic" were big appeals to me.
-
I did not read all of the posts above but just the last page.
In general I am in agreement with what has been said and can offer the following perspective.
1) I do not know what is in RMU JDE (Jay Dale Edition) except for the basics.
2) IMHO they changed and replaced things in what they thought would make it simpler but just made them different or more complex. Often I thought they just changed it because the could.
3) The combat charts and crit charts from RMU B1 were an abomination to what I enjoy in RM and most of the people I know play RM for. In general they play RM for detail and the ability more accurately represent some facet of their game and or game world.
4) In the RMU B books that I read they often tried to make the math easier but then confused things on the word side. ie, they explained things in 3 paragraphs instead of 1 and said things in the text that did not play out in the math or the rules.
In general I know people who like HARP but even that products direction has begun to turn people off but I do not know anything about new newest HARP revamp and do think some of them will buy the core book to see what if any changes are made and how they like it.
In general I think the more good RP products on the market make the industry better and even can expand to other areas such as books, movies and TV and I hope they can produce a product that more people like then dislike.
MDC
-
RMU JDE? Is that the second Beta version? The one without any combat tables?
And yes, IMO the revision went the completely wrong direction.
I was of the opinion that the revision should have been more like RMX starting out, then have an optional skill system which expanded it out to be RMSS-like, that way it would help unite the two fan bases, and if the expanded skill system had an eash conversion system, it would have allowed for releasing only one set of stats since xx skill == yy ranks in skills a, b, and c (or whatever).
but... that idea was deliberatley sabotaged behind the scenes by the 2 people who are currently running things over there (they deliberately sabotaged a number of things that we had been working on...
While I still love (old RM), I won't ever purchase any of the stuff now being released....
What a number of folks over there on the forums back then did not realize is that I have no to little control over what we did, and had to fight for everything and anything I wanted to do, AND I was required to present a specific front to the world, even when I didn't want to.... (when working for Mjolnir).
Heck, a lot of times I ended up taking the blame (from customers) for decisions that I had no part in making cause I was the face on the forums.......
-
It disappoints me to hear/see the direction RM is being take in. Most of my really great early gaming memories are from RM2, then later RMSS.
I play with some newer players pretty regularly and they are absolutely shocked when I introduce them to RM or HARP and follow it up with something along the lines of "don't even bother going to the website" because it will only aggravate you. Which I think is fair after many many many years of revision for a game that was never broken - just misrepresented.
A truncated RM version could have been produced in a matter of months using bits and pieces of existing versions - my preference:
-the armor & Spell Casting/Lists from MERP (up to level 10 fully populated like in MERP)
-the Base Hit Points/Power Points, spell aquisition & stat averaging from RMX
-Critical Charts from MERP/RMX
-the background options, Primary Skills & professional level bonuses from RM2/RMC
-5 professions - fighter, thief, ranger, mentalist, mage
-5 races - the core 4 plus either a half elf or half orc or high man
-6 cultures (rural, 2x urban, sylvan, nomad, hillock
This is all basically cut/paste
The only thing I might have done "differently" is use 1 melee attack chart & 1 missile attack chart - plus the directed spell chart - and have them with the damage caps built in like RMFRP did (I think) and relied on OB mods based on AT on the character sheet to create a little more separation....
I also would have rebalanced the SM & MM tables to actually be based on TN100 or used the HARP table because it is very diverse in what it lets you do.
This could have been to market quickly and been compatible with almost all, if not all, existing material. I would have spent resources on making the books beautiful and developing adventures and actual intellectual property. A system is incredibly hard to protect from piracy (I'm looking at Against the Dark Master).
-
I classify the beta editions in the following way, RMU B1, RMU B2 and RMU JDE but I stepped down before JDE took over the helm of RMU.
I did download a version listed as RMUB2 last year as some people were looking for a game so I wanted to see if it would work for them.
It did have crit tables more like RMSS and less a simple mathematical progression of things listed. ie less spread sheet and had a little more art to it.
Having said that, IMHO making RM simple for simplicity sake often treaded on HARP and blurred the lines between the two products, it would be better to add RM spell casting to HARP then dramatically simplify RM's math and skill system.
I like RMSS for the detail and if I want to play a less detailed game I will play something else. Also if you have computer support the game is often a lot easier to play and run.
MDC
-
Having said that, IMHO making RM simple for simplicity sake often treaded on HARP and blurred the lines between the two products, it would be better to add RM spell casting to HARP then dramatically simplify RM's math and skill system.
HARP had a number of flaws in it (I should know) all because I did not stick to my guns and let others dictate some things. If it had been released how I had originally wrote it, it would have actually been more MERP like in nature, and would have a different spell system (the wonkiness there was the buggest issue, I belive, and that is cause the actual spells got tweaked, not the system I used to make them (a mistake that is mostly on my shoulders).
And RMX? That did nto simplify Rolemaster, it simply stripped it back to the bare, and then started adding thing back in via the Express Additions. :)
I like RMSS for the detail and if I want to play a less detailed game I will play something else. Also if you have computer support the game is often a lot easier to play and run.
RMSS was good, but had its issues too (the biggest being the huge increase in number of skills without a proportional increase in DPs), and the fact that a level 1 character was barely viable.
A starting character should be fully capable (not against big threats, but against those of equal power, and most RMSS characters were not for the first few levels).
but another point of the revision was to create an easy buy in for new players, something that RMU would never do with multiple core books needed to play. RM is not D&D and needed a sngle book entry into the system.
-
I agree on the starting PC note of RMSS and I often started PC's at 3rd to 5th level if I wanted a more fleshed out PC for players to play or if I wanted to start the game as teens then start at 1st.
IMHO, no system is perfect and all have issues as it is impossible to cover all play styles, players and trends.
-
To be clear: I only provided the above example as a demonstration of how ICE could have revised in a manner that updated the rules a bit while not playing right into the hands of the 30+ years of bias from gamers that endlessly refer to RM as chartmaster etc.
Agreed - no system is perfect. RM & HARP have their strengths, just like D&D does, and Novus. I quite enjoyed RMSS actually as I found it at a time in life where I really wanted to go all in with characters and stories so the skill category system was appealing...at the time. I think a fully developed HARP/MERP hybrid (which I have poked at for my own purposes) would have been close to the ideal system (IMO) as it would been immediately more digestible than RMSS/RMFRP & ultimately RMU.
The problem with ICE is that they are, seemingly, not savvy to the fact that you have to actually have a product to sell. It's clearly being run by hobbyists, not people trying to make a living off of it, so there is this air of acceptability to the projects just dragging on forever.
-
I think we are on the same page.
MDC
-
Well, RMU has two books out. And no actual creatures to fight, but it appears they tried to cram a lot into those books that did nto need to be in the core rules.
And the first of the two books were out with no spells for months, and still no creatures....
It puts a lot of onus on the GM to make combatants. For experienced RM fans, this would not be an issue. They can always raid their previous editions of RM.
But for new players? it falls flat on its face by being too much, and too incomplete at the same time......
-
I agree you need monsters and spells...but having said that a friend loaned me his copy to read and we both did not think much of the game.
He was also interested in the new version of HARP but when he went to the website, he said it was a mess and it really turned him off of buying HARP II.
MDC
-
I agree you need monsters and spells...but having said that a friend loaned me his copy to read and we both did not think much of the game.
Yup, it is simply yet another version that will divide the RM fans even more. And then there is Against the Darkmaster which technically belongs in the same d100 family* of games, and which folks could easily adapt to bring in bits of RM that they like to expand to what they need. And I am planning on making a d20fied version of Against the Darkmaster as well (not a straight conversion, but adjust things to my preferred style of play as well).
He was also interested in the new version of HARP but when he went to the website, he said it was a mess and it really turned him off of buying HARP II.
They are doing a HARP II, huh? I think it would be hilarious if they do that and it fails... hehehe
-
A two or three ago (last time I was on the site) I heard that they were going to do a revision of HARP about the same time as RMU. I do not know if that is still in the works or if it went along the wayside.
As to if it fails or not I will let the product speak for itself but not having the support system in place (website, etc) does not make it easier for people to want to pick it up. As I said it really turned my friend off when he went to the website.
I do think now is the time for a newish or new system to break into the market as there is some upheaval with the missteps WotC has been making, the new version of 5e is a bit wacky (yes I know it is a beta but there are some very strange concepts being floated). And I do not think it would necessarily be a bad thing if another system or two became very popular.
MDC
-
I do think now is the time for a newish or new system to break into the market as there is some upheaval with the missteps WotC has been making, the new version of 5e is a bit wacky (yes I know it is a beta but there are some very strange concepts being floated). And I do not think it would necessarily be a bad thing if another system or two became very popular.
Well, Novus is available :)
I am also working on two other systems...
1) Fantasy Express -- a 2d6 based system, meant to be simple and easy...
2) DAG (Delta Adventure Game) -- a game based on Against the Darkmaster, using a d20 open-ended dice mechanic rather than d100 (likely be more palatable to D&D players upset at WotC). Though instead of spell lists, I was thinking of converting the Novus spell creation rules into a spell casting system where they construct and cast spells on the fly.....
-
According to a post on the Iron Crown forums, “The earliest HARP rulebook [2003] had 160 pages; it was replaced by a 192-page version within a handful of months [2004]. The current version of HARP [2012] is 203 pages and has ICE and GCP logos on the front.” I presume that’s RMU-contemporary revision (it just took RMU a while to come out, obviously).
-
According to a post on the Iron Crown forums, “The earliest HARP rulebook [2003] had 160 pages; it was replaced by a 192-page version within a handful of months [2004]. The current version of HARP [2012] is 203 pages and has ICE and GCP logos on the front.” I presume that’s RMU-contemporary revision (it just took RMU a while to come out, obviously).
Yup, the first release had 160 pages, and after it went out, there was some concerns about some things in regards to it (I cannot remember what exactly, that was 20 years ago afterall... hehe), and so 32 pages were added and it was re-released.
I have no idea what was added or changed in the 2012 version....
-
My personal opinion is that if you're going to make a "new" version of an existing system, then what you do is
1. Find out what bits of the old system are the most universally popular (in RM2, healers transferring wounds IMO. in HARP, mana sources and spell scaling).
2. Keep those bits.
3. Write a new system without fear of losing any of the old system *except for those bits.*
-
In general people have ideas they think are going to be great all of the time and sometimes it works and others it fails. And at times even great ideas fail and horrible ideas generate lots of $$$. But having done all of the things that are necessary to make the product successful at launch is very important.
Think about what would have happened to D&D and AD&D in that late 70's if they waited 5 years beyond launch to make all of the different dice available to play the game (that is to say the game only shipped with d6's but required D4's, D8's, D10's, D12's, D20's and D100's). I think if they had not had the various dice the game would not have gone anywhere.
But having said that, there were quite a few issues that to me, showed up at the beginning (alpha) that persisted that were problematic and these ideas lost quite a bit of what I and a lot of people I know loved about RM.
-
I took RM2, houseruled it until it was pretty much the game I wanted, and then skipped RMSS and RMFRP entirely.
And from what I've seen on the ICE forums, I suspect that my answer was the rule rather than the exception. Because of that, the publishers had a major problem in that it had "splintered" so badly that it was nearly impossible to make anything acceptable to a majority of their fanbase.
Or at least that's my understanding. I certainly could be wrong about that, it wouldn't be the first time and won't be the last.
-
Because of that, the publishers had a major problem in that it had "splintered" so badly that it was nearly impossible to make anything acceptable to a majority of their fanbase.
Oh, it had definitely splintered, and there was no easy way to bring them back together into a single fan base.
That was the reasoning behind the product line plan I had tried to layout and get approved (prior to Mjolnir losing the license) back in 2010. If you are interested in see it, i have it posted over on my personal site -- https://wizlair.net/index.php?topic=49