Is anyone using this?

[Ardem]

The RMC books of magic, arms law, core rules are included, in a cut down way but enough to get the rules, I would say 90% of what the books cover.

All the tables etc that you need to play are included and integrated into the system, as well as monsters, arms and magic lists. So you could play RMC without purchasing any books is my opinion.

On a side note I am prepare to run a teamviewer meeting for all aspiring GM's, in how to use the RMC and create your own adventures at any time. So pm me if you wish a complete run down on getting the most out of your RMC game.

[JohnD]

It's a very good implementation of a complex ruleset, although it lacks the last few years of updates that the rulesets based on Core RPG benefit from.

[Blackfoot]

It's a very good implementation of a complex ruleset, although it lacks the last few years of updates that the rulesets based on Core RPG benefit from.

Are you sure about that? It was my understanding that a number of the newer features had been incorporated into the ruleset.

[JohnD]

Are you sure about that? It was my understanding that a number of the newer features had been incorporated into the ruleset.

Well, I've recently started looking at the ruleset again after not using it since early 2014 or so. This inherently involves an updated perspective on what to expect from a ruleset after using multiple rulesets that were transitioned to Core RPG (my terminology may be wrong here... no idea... but hopefully the point is understandable). Also, I'm certainly not trying to troll or be a **** disturber or disparage anyone's work/dedication/etc....

Let me start with the caveat that, even without the last ~ 3 years of advances, RMC did and does handle a Rolemaster game like a scalding knife through soft butter. In fact, way back when observing the RMC ruleset in action and playing in a game we were both part of is what sold me on choosing Fantasy Grounds in the first place. The RMC content was my first purchase after I push my chips all-in to the middle of the table with an Ultimate license - so I was sold then and I'm sold now... but that doesn't mean I don't see the GM's job made more difficult by the absence of a number of items.

There have been statements that RMC isn't built on Core RPG; as I am not a programmer, I don't really understand the significance of this, other than the statement also came with a follow-up statement that as a result the advances in Core RPG aren't built into RMC. I could very well be wrong about this, but at first blush I'm not seeing it. Again, I have no frame of reference, but I suspect that moving RMC to be a Core RPG ruleset would fall under the "difficult", "time consuming" and "likely financially or otherwise impractical" categories.

There are a lot of things that aren't present today that have been added to Core RPG rulesets over the past 3 years. Their absence doesn't mean you can't run a game in RMC, just that you need to adjust how you do things. During the recent refresher Ardem was nice enough to host for Andraax and I, most of my questions revolved around "how to you work around not having (a,b,c,d,etc...)?" Some of those questions Ardem answered on his own without me even having to ask... so that tells me IMO at least, that functionality adds would be a Great Thing. Some of the answers were of the "you don't" variety.

Targeting has been updated - that much I notice.

I understand that RMC is possibly one of the least utilized commercial rulesets on FG, just based off of having been very active on the boards and seeing relatively little activity in the dedicated section, the LFG section and the common discussion areas. I know you can't base your full opinion off of that, but the yearly usage rates information shows RMC and C&C are close to equal, and since C&C is my other favourite ruleset, I can compare and contrast a bit.

But... I go back to my caveat - the FG ruleset handles the Rolemaster system amazingly - it just doesn't have a lot of the things that have become common. This makes using it more "fiddly". I also suspect that preparing for RMU plays/played a part in this.

• Party Sheet and all the functionality that goes with it (easy to reference stat/skill blocks for the party, marching order, watch order, XP monitoring and awarding from Quests and Encounters).
• Ability to open the Images folder in game.
• Old style flags across the bottom instead of the new sorting through all/selected resources methodology - applies to Images, NPCs, Items, Story entries, Encounters, and possibly a few things I'm forgetting.
• Treasure Parcels and the ability to easily distribute contents.
• Quests and Encounters that a GM can easily distribute XP automatically (understanding that much of the XP gain methodology is different in Rolemaster and without an automated tracker built in, some of this just can't be done).
• Automated XP tracking as per standard RMC.
• Token facing functionality.
• GM Ownership on the Character Selection screen.

If any of these things are present, I would be very happy to have their presence pointed out to me. There's probably a few things I'm missing on that list... I blame the perpetual fog of a number of years of chronic insomnia resulting in an average of 90 minutes of sleep on an average night.

[Stuart]

John, I've been absent from FG for a number of years so I don't know what modifications have been made to it since it's creation by Digital Adventures. As one of the people who built the thing many years ago I'm pleased that it has some loyal fans (much like the pen and paper system I guess). Sadly, the coding that went into automating combat (which is the probably THE biggest selling point) is beyond my geriatric brain to engineer or add to but ... I bet those of us who love this system could put together a wish list and maybe find people "out there" to help bring the RMC up to date? I've just started a 5th Edition (don't judge me) game and have been amazed at how much is now automated ... it would be lovely to see this in the RMC too. However, as it stands (missing many bells and whistles based on your post) it's still enough to make running a game plausible. Well, I guess I'll soon find out.

[JohnD]

Oh most definitely the ruleset is up to the task. Doesn't mean it couldn't be better though.

I just spent 3 hours tonight with a couple of people walking them through most of a character creation session.

I'd love to see the added functionality, but I have no idea how gargantuan a task that would be.

[Blackfoot]

Honestly, Dakadin is probably the best equipped to answer your issues. The Ruleset has had several major upgrades since it's creation.

[Ardem]

DEfinately it has some major additions since the creation. Most notability are the stat generation , and skill generation pages. The targeting via the map instead of the combat tracker, phases included. Movement Manevuer included, static manevuer included. This is just a few there is a ton more I have not mentioned

There has been a lot done by Dakadin.

I think what the Core version could bring to the table with the points specific about by JohnD would be great as well, but it comes down to really someones free time and ability to code it. RMC is a beer making product, what i mean by that is there not a lot of copies sold, and really makes enough money to purchase a free case of beer over time. So it the love of the ruleset that why people do it. There is no fulltime developer, it relies on the generosity of a coder or two.

If it get done great if not, the existing ruleset still does a great job.

[JohnD]

Well, I've recently started looking at the ruleset again after not using it since early 2014 or so. This inherently involves an updated perspective on what to expect from a ruleset after using multiple rulesets that were transitioned to Core RPG (my terminology may be wrong here... no idea... but hopefully the point is understandable). Also, I'm certainly not trying to troll or be a **** disturber or disparage anyone's work/dedication/etc....

Let me start with the caveat that, even without the last ~ 3 years of advances, RMC did and does handle a Rolemaster game like a scalding knife through soft butter. In fact, way back when observing the RMC ruleset in action and playing in a game we were both part of is what sold me on choosing Fantasy Grounds in the first place. The RMC content was my first purchase after I push my chips all-in to the middle of the table with an Ultimate license - so I was sold then and I'm sold now... but that doesn't mean I don't see the GM's job made more difficult by the absence of a number of items.

There have been statements that RMC isn't built on Core RPG; as I am not a programmer, I don't really understand the significance of this, other than the statement also came with a follow-up statement that as a result the advances in Core RPG aren't built into RMC. I could very well be wrong about this, but at first blush I'm not seeing it. Again, I have no frame of reference, but I suspect that moving RMC to be a Core RPG ruleset would fall under the "difficult", "time consuming" and "likely financially or otherwise impractical" categories.

There are a lot of things that aren't present today that have been added to Core RPG rulesets over the past 3 years. Their absence doesn't mean you can't run a game in RMC, just that you need to adjust how you do things. During the recent refresher Ardem was nice enough to host for Andraax and I, most of my questions revolved around "how to you work around not having (a,b,c,d,etc...)?" Some of those questions Ardem answered on his own without me even having to ask... so that tells me IMO at least, that functionality adds would be a Great Thing. Some of the answers were of the "you don't" variety.

Targeting has been updated - that much I notice.

I understand that RMC is possibly one of the least utilized commercial rulesets on FG, just based off of having been very active on the boards and seeing relatively little activity in the dedicated section, the LFG section and the common discussion areas. I know you can't base your full opinion off of that, but the yearly usage rates information shows RMC and C&C are close to equal, and since C&C is my other favourite ruleset, I can compare and contrast a bit.

But... I go back to my caveat - the FG ruleset handles the Rolemaster system amazingly - it just doesn't have a lot of the things that have become common. This makes using it more "fiddly". I also suspect that preparing for RMU plays/played a part in this.

• Party Sheet and all the functionality that goes with it (easy to reference stat/skill blocks for the party, marching order, watch order, XP monitoring and awarding from Quests and Encounters).
• Ability to open the Images folder in game.
• Old style flags across the bottom instead of the new sorting through all/selected resources methodology - applies to Images, NPCs, Items, Story entries, Encounters, and possibly a few things I'm forgetting.
• Treasure Parcels and the ability to easily distribute contents.
• Quests and Encounters that a GM can easily distribute XP automatically (understanding that much of the XP gain methodology is different in Rolemaster and without an automated tracker built in, some of this just can't be done).
• Automated XP tracking as per standard RMC.
• Token facing functionality.
• GM Ownership on the Character Selection screen.

If any of these things are present, I would be very happy to have their presence pointed out to me. There's probably a few things I'm missing on that list... I blame the perpetual fog of a number of years of chronic insomnia resulting in an average of 90 minutes of sleep on an average night.

Add rollable tables to my list above and the ability to assign links to items, story entries, encounters etc... to said rollable tables.

[Blackfoot]

Personally, I doubt anything new will happen until the Unity thing goes through. Plus, I haven't seen any posts from Dakadin in a bit so I'm guessing he's tied up with life currently.

That aside.. the RM ruleset is a very useful tool for running RM.. a game with LOTS of cool complexity that is all brought together into the ruleset.