Posted on

Professions and Skills for the Navigator RPG

In my advancing years, I have ceased being a fan of Skills-based RPGs, and Rolemaster, I am told, quite ironically is Skills. I much prefer the idea of working out resolutions at the table as situations arise, and this lends itself well to the style of play in “first generation” games. Here is an example: in a Swords & Wizardry game I had all PCs make Save rolls vs inclement weather, but the Druid (and this would have applied to a Ranger, too) got to Save for “free,” without a roll. The game was text-based, online, and the Druid gamer sent me one of these: 😍. In contrast, recently in an Against the Darkmaster game, two PCs rolled to detect something in a forest. One succeeded at hearing an unusual sound, the other didn’t. The one who didn’t was an Elf. “That’s odd,” said that player, and, for awhile (being a 1e gamer), that player truly believed that something mysterious was going on. He was an Elf, and Elves simply hear things in a forest. He was a bit surprised when I explained to him that, no, his ignorant Elf simply had spectacularly failed his Perception roll.

I recognize now that I should have dealt with the situation by letting the Elf hear the sound “for free” and requiring the humans in the group to make Skill rolls. I suspect that this is how Peter R runs his games, but Rolemaster, for me, is so “roll-heavy” that I routinely forget to stop and think like this. There’s a Skill for nearly everything, and characters have been built to be “good” at these things because of reliance on their Skill rolls. Perhaps I should have stopped and given the Elf a bonus on the roll, but that’s figured already—that’s Elven racial modifiers. The truth is that, with Skill-heavy games, too often I am lulled into ignoring simple common sense in terms of the fiction.

But what happens when I outright remove Skills? It never occurs to some players that, say, their Fighter character might diversify into some Thief-based qualities. Original iterations of the game provide the highly clunky “dual classing” to accommodate this, though this still tends to keep caster types sacrosanct and unattainable. I think we RM games appreciate a little magical possibility in all our classes. I also know that some gamers heavily rely on a list of Skills to visualize their characters and conceive of which their adventurers are capable.

For Navigator RPG, therefore, my wish is for a sweet spot of basic Class abilities, allowance of common sense, and serviceable, core Skill systems. In the following sections I make some comments on the existing Professions that Peter has adopted from White Star as well as his inclusion of the Mystic. I also propose two of my own, and draft what seem to me a serviceable set of Skills.

Aristocrat

It seems sort of odd for this to be a “Profession,” but I very much like it as an archetype. I see a bit of both Leia and (weirdly) Lando in this one. I wonder how Peter is going to use the “Charm Person” quality here. Perhaps it makes more sense to simply give the Aristocrat a special “Convince” or “Befriend” Skill based on Level (I have nothing like this in my lists below). Perhaps something based on a Resistance Roll (using the Aristocrat’s Level) also is a good idea.

Mercenary 

I wonder what, if anything, Peter will do with the attacks per Level against creatures of 1 HD or fewer. In my reduced Combat Skills list, I would allow Mercenaries to specialize in one or two Combat skills, giving them a one-time bonus at character creation in these.

Pilot

I really like the OSR construction of this character class, but this archetype’s ability to take rounds of combat to manipulate the qualities of a starship might better be modeled with Skills in the Navigator RPG. I wonder what changes we will see and if, consequently, the Pilot’s White Star adequacy will be diminished.

Star Knight 

…

Mystic 

This is Peter’s Spacemaster telepath or mentat. It’s often amused me that science fiction has regarded mind powers as much more “believable” than magic. Anyway, I think it’s an element highly required in Navigator, and I’m quite eager to write about mentalism and its powers with great detail in the future.

Technician and Scientist

At this point, I don’t have much to say about my two additions, but I felt that they should be represented. As with the Mercenary, though I expect these classes to be generally capable, I would have them pick one or two specializations in which to gain some one-time bonuses.

And here follow my lists of proposed skills.

Combat 

Melee. This would include all melee weapons as well as unarmed combat.

Primitive projectiles

Modern projectiles. “Modern” here would include everything that is modern within the game setting: energy and laser weapons would be included.

Heavy weapons

Vehicle weapons 

General

Adventuring. This is a catch-all, including Survival and First Aid (also, possibly, Perception).

Athletics 

Stealth

Fine tasks

Piloting

Specific 

Cultures

Systems 

Machines 

Sciences

Navigation 

Finally, Peter has plans for armor proficiencies, which I think is a great idea, and Body Development and “Spellcasting” abilities should be handled separately.

Posted on

Stats (and Skills) in the Navigator RPG

A close reading of Peter R’s Navigator update causes me to believe that, so far, the most salient part of White Star that he is using are the adventuring professions. The rest appears in common with the d100 system that we all love. This strikes me as an opportunity to revisit this latter system, and I shall begin where character creation commences: stats.

Stats define the character, and, broadly speaking, there are three intentions to be considered as one employs player characteristics in game design. PC attributes are the result of a simulation of chance (aka deterministic nature), a player’s predetermined character concept, or a combination of these. This last is the approach Peter has adopted for Navigator: players roll their stats (the deterministic “mini game”) but they get to assign them (the “build”) and, most importantly, if they don’t get numbers high enough, two can be replaced with 90s.

I think the Navigator design process is an opportunity for Peter to revisit Spacemaster’s ten stats. As I have written before, I like the symmetry of ten stats within a percentile system. But that symmetry is sort of broken when Peter assigns three of the ten as bonuses to individual Skills. And, as I have said (again in the article linked above), I like the symmetry of three, which breaks down into the three traditionally-regarded aspects of the person: mind, body, and soul.

I should add here, looking ahead in the design process, that rough Skill “groups” might conveniently break down into three (as is sort of demonstrated in Against the Darkmaster). For Spacemaster these Skill categories could be Combat, Utility and Learning. Should there be ten Skills in each category? Maybe. I might prefer five, but such a paltry value might reflect a “lite” version of our favorite d100 game.

While I’m on the topic of symmetry, it appears that original Spacemaster is likewise considerate of this aspect of elegance. Five of its stats it identifies as “Development Stats;” the remaining five are “Primary Stats.” These designations represent the “mini game” of early Spacemaster character creation: high numbers in Development Stats garner more Development Points for Skills. But high Primary Stats (maybe) directly benefit more “useful” Skills. The parenthetical “maybe” reveals my uncertainty that the distinctions here result in “meaningful” choices (I’m not going to plunge that deeply into this old design) at character creation, and I’m not sure that Constitution (identified as a Development Stat) believably should result in DPs.

This topic of “meaningful choices” should be kept in mind as Peter assigns Stats to Skills. All of the stats should be used more or less commensurately. I’m not saying that they need to be “balanced,” but all should find some use within the game. Another way of putting this directive is that attributes such as Charisma should not immediately be regarded as a “dump stat.” These White Box games have done well to dignify this stat (and Wisdom) by awarding an xp bonus for a high value. If it becomes a last resort, Navigator might consider something similar. Finally, a good first principle would be to try to find a stat from each of the three aspects of the person to modify each Skill.

So now I’m again privileging three aspects of the person. Can I convince Peter to go with nine stats instead of ten? Here they are in categories, to see what might be thrown out.

MIND: Self-Discipline, Memory, Reasoning 

BODY: Constitution, Agility, Strength, Quickness 

SOUL: Presence, Intuition, Empathy 

Looks like I’d wrap Agility and Quickness together, reducing body to three stats.

Posted on

Spacemaster and the OSR

I’m of two minds while reading about Peter R’s development of Navigator RPG. As far as I can tell, it purposes to be an open content retroclone of Spacemaster but using the convenient OGL of White Star, which is based on the “White Box” version of the Original Game. 

I fully support the mechanics of this decision. Swords & Wizardry has become my game of choice: quick-playing and eminently malleable. Though my own preference is for Swords & Wizardry Complete, I can see the rationale in adopting White Box: since this form uses only d20s and d6s for its mechanical resolution, conversions to d100 should be efficient.

My ambivalence arises from the sources that are inherent in White Star’s inspirations. The strongest influence appears to be Star Wars, and Star Wars—at least to me—is not science fiction. It’s fantasy skinned with spaceships and laser swords. I’m not saying that this kind of fantasy is “bad fun” (for me, Star Wars is very fun, especially the d6 version). I’m saying that this is out of alignment with the ethos of Spacemaster.

But of which Spacemaster do I speak? I own the first edition, the one that is directly compatible with RM2. I’ve never played this edition (or any others). I’m not sure if I can. It’s a fascinating read. Yet, as a publication predating the Information Age, some parts are quaint, and Tech Law’s details for starship construction are utterly confounding. One thing it is not, though: it is not Star Wars (though I believe it accommodates, in part, a player’s desire to play a Jedi Knight). And if it also isn’t, precisely, “hard” science fiction, it at least attempts to be “realistic.”

One of the ways in which it is realistic, I suppose, is in its range of Professions. Do you want to play a Research or Field Scientist? How about a Machine Tech? If one follows the usually reliable dictum that a game’s rules telegraph what the game is about, then this feels a bit like Star Trek (which I consider “pseudo-science”). Is your character going to specialize in Planetology? Then what are your “adventures” going to be like?

Dr. Mind: Captain, I’ve determined that this atmosphere contains high volumes of nitrous oxide.

Captain Stern: Very good. Crew, ready yourselves for nitrous breathers.

What a challenge this level of verisimilitude must be for the GM.

An even better indication of Spacemaster’s mundane orientation is in its Races and Cultures. There are no “aliens,” precisely. I understand that Spacemaster 2e does provide a few samples with the caveat that alien intelligence in the universe is highly unlikely, and, even if one were encountered, it’s doubtful that homo sapiens would be able to recognize one as such. The “otherness” of wonder and exploration is nonetheless provided in Spacemaster’s trans humanist vision: humans have colonized space, adapted, mutated, evolved and even modified themselves genetically and technologically. In Spacemaster, artificial intelligence has emerged. I’ve begun to prefer human centrism in my fantasy games, so this aspect of science fiction play greatly appeals to me.

Again, I think Peter R is correct in choosing White Star as his starting point. Moreover, White Star’s more obvious “adventuring classes,” I suppose, are a necessity. I’m not certain about all I’ve been reading about the inclusion of alien species, however, and this has led me to wonder what precisely is being “revived” with the OSR label on this project. As we all know, all game systems are simply tools, and I look forward to adapting Navigator RPG to my preferred form of mundane science fiction. I also wonder at which point, though, rules become so entwined with tone and implied setting as to be inextricable.

Posted on

Going to GenCon: What to See?

This August I will be heading to GenCon, which is one of the largest tabletop RPG conventions in the world. I am really looking forward to it, primarily to see some new and old systems being played (I’m especially eager to try out Pathfinder 2, Starfinder, and Adventures in Middle Earth). I have two questions for our RM Blog community:

For those who have been there before: Do you have any recommendations on what to do or see? I botched my first attempt to navigate the event finder system, which meant that I missed out on all the MERP sessions being offered, but there’s still lots to see and do. What would you say is a ‘don’t miss!’?

For those who aren’t going: Is there anything you’d like me to check out? I will be playing Pathfinder 2, Starfinder, Adventures in Middle Earth, probably some DnD, and I might try Numenera and/or Star Wars d6 too. If you have any booth you’d like me to check out, rules you’d like me to see in play, or anything else that I could quickly find out for you, please let me know. I will be playing and possibly GMing, but if I have time to help you out, I will.

Posted on

Hacking Darkmaster

I’m guessing that it’s not precisely “news” to readers here that the QuickStart Deluxe of Against the Darkmaster (VsD) has been released as pay what you want on DriveThruRPG. The latest articulation has introduced some changes to my game. Most radical is a reduction of five Armours (None, Soft Leather, Rigid Leather, Chain and Plate) to four (None, Light, Medium, Heavy). Most sneaky is total Success on the maneuver table has been reduced to 100 from 110.

The most radical change, however, (and I’m talking specifically about my home game now) is how I’ve undertaken to transform VsD’s entire d100 system into something that works better for the players at my table. Approaching something like this, I often feel out of place in the company I keep here on this blog. I’m becoming convinced that a “simple,” homebrewed d20 system is most comfortable for my gaming table, though I continue to be enamored with the design possibilities in Rolemaster d100 mechanisms.

And I thought I was going to revert to a d20 system and simply carry on with the campaign characters until I remembered how one player in particular appreciates VsD’s and others’ core percentile principle.

A lot of what I’m going to say here I already have shared with the VsD designers, but I think these comments might be of equal interest to RM gamers. I’m going to structure this discussion by presenting two “problems” that I have been endeavoring to “solve,” each followed by a “solution.”

Combat 

At the beginning of last year I determined to run Middle-Earth Role Playing (MERP). I quickly grew irritated, while trying to track the various weapon “stats” that modified the rolls and results on the attack tables. A “solution” appeared to be to adopt RM2, but then my burden was to track tables for every single weapon.

Interjection

I’m already anticipating a response from the RM community to my complaints, so let me try to provide more context here. When I was young, my friends and I were deeply interested in the simulationist aspects of rpgs. We didn’t care at all how much time—or math—was required of us to resolve a single conflict. It was common for a combat to involve hours of our time. My group now isn’t interested as much in that. Obviously, we’re not plunging fully into story games, but we’re more interested in narrative. We also don’t believe that a lucky shot from a mook necessarily should be able to outright kill a player character.

I have received advice from RM gamers concerning the time management element. Give attack tables to the players, say some gamers. I’m certain this works for some groups, but not mine. One of my players will outright refuse. He says that I’m lucky he “rolls his own dice,” and he’s only partly jesting here. And even if the other players were willing to take on this work, as GM I’d still have to be monitoring their work. These are casual gamers.

So the bottom line is that all this, as it is with any group, is about how my players and I detail the game system that we need for our table. And our struggles and solutions might be of interest to some other groups.

VsD, cleaving more closely to MERP than RM, uses weapon stats and consolidated attack tables. I have consolidated the attack tables into a single one closely modeled on the maneuver table. All weapon types are assigned damage dice, based on 1d10 for one-handed and 2d10 for two-handed. Armours deduct results on the critical tables in increments of 10 per armour type.

Skills 

“I use like three of these,” said a player, referring to a VsD character sheet that, incidentally, is significantly more compressed than any RM sheet. So we reduced Skills into general categories, and each breaks down into two types of uses or applications, and each of these are modified by two discrete character Stats. I enjoy how other versions of RM use multiple and complementary attributes to modify specific Skills. The latest version of RM uses three of its ten for each Skill, sometimes “double dipping,” when there aren’t other clear associations.

So, instead of assigning Ranks to granular Skills, in our hack, at Level advancement PCs gain bonuses in broader Skill categories.

Concluding Thoughts 

My group has made changes, also, to how the GM handles NPCs, and it’s also wrestling with VsD’s use of Drive Points—in fact, we’re considering outright dropping this meta currency. But the largest consideration we have is whether we keep the d100 roll. I think most of us will agree that most bonuses in an RM game reduce neatly from +5 (on a d100) to a +1 (on a d20). So why deal with 100 numbers rather than 20? Honestly, for greater ease of roll resolution, I see no reason outside of the relative Fumble values, though these could be remedied: a second roll could follow any roll of 1 to determine if a particular weapon is fumbled. Incidentally, I see that Chivalry & Sorcery has done something similar, offering a C&S “Essence” rules set in addition to its “Rebirth.” I’m similarly curious about the news of an upcoming “lite” version of RM.

What are your thoughts? Why do we gamers want 100 numbers?

Posted on

Update

Due to very sudden and unexpected changes in health I would really like it if a couple of other writers could make a posts in the next few weeks.

Thanks

Peter.

Posted on

Lazy GMing: Inside your NPCs Heads and Hearts

Recently, I played around with random tables for village names, industries, street plans and then a plot hook to give the PCs something to do.

Since then I have been playing with a new web-based toy and I thought you may like it.

Before I introduce it I want to explain the how and why of using it.

What it does is provide you with a couple of little pictures or icons, I use two but you will have an option for one to six at a time. These icons are completely random, sometimes vague and always open to interpretation. The way I have been using it is to grabl two icons for every NPC I am adding to an adventure, at the planning stage not during play. The icons are used as inspiration for what is in the NPCs hearts or minds.

For example. I created a Lady in Waiting for an adventure thinking that the PCs may want to use a charm or suggestion spell to turn an insider on to their side. When I created the NPC I drew a Wheel and a Shield icon. The first thing that came into my head was that a wheel can mean change or revolution and the shield could mean being defensive or hiding something. All of a sudden this lady in waiting is actually very sympathetic to a group of anti royalists but is hiding her sympathies.

The chances of this ever coming out in play is probably under 1% but if it did, if a player decided or overcast Telepathy on her for no reason I suddenly have an answer to what is going on in her head. If you charm her and now she is your friend and you raise the subject of breaking in to the castle then she is actually going to be more open to the idea than another NPC.

I grabbed two more icons for a military type and got an Arrow and Flaming breath, that immediately said typical sergeant major to me, straight to the point and will ball you out for the slightest discretion.

Since I have been using these, they add about 30 seconds to creating an NPC but they add a whole world of potential depth to people your PCs meet and can create endless sub-plots and side quests if you wanted.

So that is what it is for. The tool is called Zero Dice and you can find it at Tangent Zero. Leave the Dice Type to image and then click one of the “roll 1” to “Roll 6” buttons.

As another example I have an NPC who will be sharing a dungeon with the PCs. Let us find out more about him.

So I am seeing a deadly plant and a gift. It could be that our prisoner is a gifted poisoner but I like the idea more that he stupidly send a poisonous plant (poison ivy maybe) to the lord of the castle as a sort of protest.

You do not need to take the icons literally, there are some icons in the set that contain battery charge levels such as these…

I use these often as an indication of energy levels, or stress or even health. Not everyone you meet is going to be on full hits, some people are having a bad day even before they meet the PCs.

You just have to let your imagination be inspired by these visual prompts.

Posted on

Saying No but Meaning Yes

I play in a RMC game where the GM is the type to look for any excuse to punish the characters. Examples from the last session are when we paid passage with a wagon caravan between cities but the player had never asked about paying for food, just travel so the GM sprung it upon us that on the first night everyone else had food and we didn’t. Another example was that we were caring for an NPC who was in a coma. We were travelling by wagon. I said to the GM “I will tend the patient on the journey”, being a lay healer this seemed a natural thing to do. Five days later the GM comes up with “You never said you were going to give him anything to drink.” What! As far as I am concerned “tending the patient” is a modern contraction of “Attended to the patient’s needs” and I took it as read that food and water are fairly basic needs.

But, that is the GMs style. Every time he tries to trip us up like this I create a little checklist and in all future interactions I run through it. I even upset him last time as I had explicitly written on my character sheet that my tin and copper coins were in a belt pouch, my bronze and silver were in a pouch around my neck but under my shirt and my gold was in a pouch at the bottom of my pack. He told me that I discovered my purse had been stolen and to rub out the coins on my character sheet, to which I replied “Which one?” Two can play at being pedantic.

For the most part it is the GMs job to say “Yes”. We are there to help the story unfold. If the characters have a plan that they have the skills to carry out and they make the skill rolls then the answer to their questions should normally be a “Yes”. Saying “No” to your players too often is a sure fire way to stagnate your game.

In a barroom brawl my players don’t even ask me if there is a bottle they can grab as a weapon, they just tell me that they grab a bottle. How does it advance the story if there is no bottle? On the other hand if the player goes for a bottle against unarmed hooligans they have just escalated the conflict significantly and it could have consequences.

Sometimes I will add in a condition. If you want to swing of the chandelier then I will tell you where they are if they are not in immediate reach. It is then your choice if you want to go ahead.

Sometimes we just need to say “No” because that is the way the world is. “Is the castle gate shut?” is a yes/no question and if the gate is not open it is quite definitely shut. That is simply narrative and you could be starting to build the challenge that the characters need to face, how to get into the castle when it is under lockdown.

Last post I was talking about improve skills. All GMs need decent improv skills to be able to whip up an NPC as needed or to adapt the challenge as the characters make their decisions.

The improve technique I want to talk about here is “No, because…” In improv theatre a flat No is considered ‘blocking’ it prevents the other improvisational actors from taking the scene forward. It is the same in rpgs. Just saying No to your players does not normally move the story forward but even if you keep it to yourself, as will frequently be the case, the ‘because’ creates a route by which the players can turn the No into a Yes of sorts.

Take the example of trying to question a villains lackey. The player wants to cast Charm Kind on the lackey and the as best friends want the lackey to help him sneak into the villains tower. You know that this will completely defeat the point of the adventure. The villain is a red herring and it is what the characters will discover on the way to him that will reveal the next stage of their quest.

So we are faced with a charmed lackey. Will he sneak the character into the tower? No, because his life would be forfeit if it was discovered that he had breached the security.

That seems fairly normal but in fact it gives the characters something they can work with. If all the inhabitants are in fear of their lives for disobeying an order that could be used in duping a different npc, who they can put in a position of believing that if they do not do what they characters demand that the villain will be so angry they will probably not survive.

During the GM prep time or when you are plotting you keep in mind ‘No, because’ you can apply it whenever you block a route or close of a course of action. The reasons are part of the story and should help make the world more coherent.

Posted on

Navigator RPG

So I have been thinking about my Spacemaster idea from last week. There are a few threads I want to pull together today.

Cepheus vs Whitebox

There are two potential ‘original sources’. The first, as pointed out by Egdcltd was Cepheus. This is basically Traveller with the serial numbers filed off. So the core mechanic is 2d6 + skill and roll over target number.

The Cepheus Light rules are a complete set of Sci Fi rules and cover everything from character create to starship combat and planet building. Those rule weigh in at just under 170 pages.

Whitestar by Whitebox on the other hand is a D&D in space game OSR build. It is closer to the original sources as Rolemaster was D&D house rules so this would be Spacemaster as Whitestar house rules. As a d20 system the conversion to d100 is simple and logical. The rules as sold are 134 pages all in including setting, starting adventures and the game rules.

In terms of popularity Cepheus is a Pay What You Want game that has achieved Silver metal status. Whitestar is also PWYW but is a Gold metal product. The PWYW is important as you only get metal ratings if you actually pay for the PDF/book and most people don’t pay when they can have the PDF for free. If only 1% paid then the actual number of downloads would be in excess of 10,000 and 50,000 respectively. Whatever way you cut it Whitestar appears to be four or five times as popular as Cepheus.

Collaboration

Over in Zweihander-land I have been running some collaborative projects. In principle it works like this. I suggest a title, I set up simple shared project management board where people can list the content they are working on and can then list when it is all completed. I then do the page layout and put the book on sale. Profits are shared on a pro-rata basis using page count as the unit of measure.

It works, and works well with that group of developers because there is a real sense of helping each other out. It is very non-competitive. I would go so far as to say it is very supportive.

The most important thing is to leave your ego at the door.

I am not entirely sure if the Rolemaster community could pull off the same level of collaboration. To be fair Brian, Egdcltd and I managed it with the 50in50 adventures so it is possible. Creating an entire game system is a little harder as there will always be the tug of war between simplicity and complexity. That question has never been suitably answered. That is in part why I mentioned right from the start RM2 rather than Rolemaster in general. I find RM2 fans are more open to simpler games because at the start RM2 was a rather simple game.

What’s in a name?

Finally, I have been tossing names around recently and I have rather grown to like Navigator RPG. It is a bit of a nod to Shadow World. If you use a Sci Fi type font it looks quite cool. Also, just as important there is no Navigator RPG at the moment. I say at the moment as there used to a game a Gamma World retro clone but the last update on their blog/site was eight years ago and the game never made it onto Drivethru or RPGnow.

Posted on

Thinking About Square One

Unless you have been living in a monastic cell for the last decade you cannot have failed to be aware of the OSR movement. You can be forgiven for not knowing what the R in OSR stands for but that is par for the course. It could be Old School Revival or it could be Renaissance or quite simply Old School Rules, who knows and frankly who cares.

The OSR movement is about trying to capture that feeling of simpler times from the 1980s RPGs but that is a pretty fuzzy idea and as such it encompasses a lot of vagaries. For example Zweihander is a thoroughly modern game but also considers itself a Warhammer retro clone and markets itself as OSR game. Curiously the DrivethruRPG categories it puts itself in are “d100 / d100 Lite”, “Old-School Revival (OSR)” and “Other OSR Games”. I don’t really know when something becomes ‘Lite’ but Zwei is a 700 core rulebook and already has multiple supplements of additional rules and is growing.

OSR often means D&D Basic/Expert set clones or AD&D 1st Ed. clones. We have seen above that Warhammer retro clones also qualify.

By every measure RM2 should qualify as an OSR game, but that is not where I am going with this.

Square one in Rolemaster terms was as a set of house rules for D&D. If there is one thing that the readers of this blog are good at is House Rules, we propose them by the bucket-load.

In my opinion RMu is moving ever further away from its D&D roots. This is not a bad thing. If you try to be too D&D then you may was well play D&D. There are enough previous editions of varying complexity to satisfy most tastes.

What I was thinking was more along the lines of a “gateway drug”. An original set of house rules for OSR D&D/clones that fix what we know to be the original flaws in the system like the implied DB associated with different armours.

I don’t want to stomp on ICE’s toes but how about a Sci-Fi OSR game. SMu is so far in the future I find it hard to envision it ever existing. Anyone with a RM2 Creatures and Treasure has all the conversion rules they need (these are also in the download vault over on the forums if you don’t have the original C&T).

Furthermore, I would quite like to put all the rules under the OGL license or even better a CC license so it will be perpetually free. I don’t have time to write it all right now but I think I could set up a shared development infrastructure (I know that sounds complex but it really isn’t). What it would entail would be a Trello shared board which would be used to control the project management and documents stored on the cloud, probably google docs so anyone can dip in and work on the project.

I will cogitate a bit more on this idea and blog again on it next week. I think it has legs. I also think that between us we could create a perpetually free RM2 retro clone that will keep Rolemaster alive forever regardless of what happens to ICE in the future.