[RPG]: Character Law (1st and 2nd edition), reviewed by Lev Lafayette (2/2)

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/12/12885.phtml

Lev Lafayette's Summary:

An excellent challenge to the idea of restricted class-systems with a extensive skill selection and good task resolution concept. Implementation however was rarely as good as the ideas and text suffered from poor organisation and presentation.

Go to the full review for more information.

[sbca1995]

This may be your best review yet. I really enjoyed reading it.

[JRM]

Good review, covers all the bases and gives insight into what the game's like without getting to wordy. Please accept some Kudos.

Of course I didn't just write that because I agree with most of Lev's criticisms of Character / Campaign Law.

There are a couple of points I'd like to add. The Rolemaster skill list is a bit problematic since it includes some extremely useful skills and some that are virtually useless. For example, if Adrenal Defense is a very powerful skill if you pick a profession that can buy it cheaply since it basically means you can get a great Defense Bonus without having to use any of your melee weapon skill to parry with. A related problem (which only really took off with the Companions) is that as time went on the Rolemaster system got more and more useful and possibly necessary skills, but the characters still had the same amount of points to buy them with. When we played it we often didn't feel like we had enough skill-points to buy a rounded character.

Oh, and having characters roll for stat increases every level (and several times during character generation) was a bit fiddly, partly you had to recalculate your Development Points when one of your first five stats went up. It'd have been simpler if DPs were based on a character's potential stats rather than their current ones.

[Lev Lafayette]

Originally Posted by JRM

Good review, covers all the bases and gives insight into what the game's like without getting to wordy. Please accept some Kudos.

Oh, I always accept kudos. They're tasty

A related problem (which only really took off with the Companions) is that as time went on the Rolemaster system got more and more useful and possibly necessary skills, but the characters still had the same amount of points to buy them with. When we played it we often didn't feel like we had enough skill-points to buy a rounded character.

*nods* That was indeed part of the motivation behind RoCo VI's "Unified Skill System"; it allowed the scope of variation through specialisation etc but reduced the sheer quantity of skills to a manageable level.

[Wood]

I used to have a copy of Character Law/Campaign Law, and yes, it was a bit too hefty for the staples.

I recall in the experience point section a bit about how a character could get experience points ("essence" points) if the player (italics theirs) destroyed precious gems. Am I going nuts? Is my memory deceiving me?

[Lev Lafayette]

Originally Posted by Wood

I recall in the experience point section a bit about how a character could get experience points ("essence" points) if the player (italics theirs) destroyed precious gems. Am I going nuts? Is my memory deceiving me?

Ahh, yes, I'd forgotten that lovely confusion between "player" and "character" which, as you say, had player emphasised - and made it through all three versions of Character Law.

Of course, one must ask how is a player going to find a Lords of Essence forge?

[Grimmstorm]

Oh my....I loved RM2 dearly and actually still do but back in the days when I used to play it regularly I really hated it for it's convoluted skills-system: so many skills and always there were more beeing introduced. Most of them were pure nonsense like "farting", "farting with your left but only", "farting with your right but only" "slow farting" and "farting under pressure"

If the rules were thought through well when they were introduced back in the 80s, there wouldn't ever have been a diving skill - cause that could have been done by the swimming skill with expanded rules and it would have been fine.
I really would love to know how many groups used some of the more queer skills like "sense reality warp" ec. I guess only very few did.
Anyway, all of these things could be handled by a good GM without any undue trouble and so we greatly enjoyed RM2.

Now that RM CLassic just got published I got back to the gaming table with some of my old RM mates and was wondering if it would be worth the money to buy the new ED of this ol'dog. What's the primary differences? Has anyone playtested that thing? Can you make a decent comparison between RM2 and RM classic? And nope - no need to try to convince me of the qualities of RMSS, RMFRP... I have no love for the reworked RM.

I would be gald for any bits and pieces...