[Rolemaster] When Worlds Collide - A perfect execution of simulationist play

[Joe J Prince]

Well I've just returned from one of my quasi-regular jaunts north of the border which means I actually got to do some role-playing! Woo-pah!

The main reason was our group's epic Rolemaster campaign "When Worlds Collide". It's been running (sporadically) for about 7 years now. Some of us were younger than our PCs when we started. Not any more though. :-)

We also had some Ronnies related rpg action giving award winner Contenders a good go - I'll post about that presently.

Anyway back to RM. This is the first episode we've played since I discovered the Forge and I'm now able to categorise the game as pure beautifully executed Simulationism. Not usually my preferred creative agenda (or rpg system)...
BUT WWC is quite simply the best campaign I've ever played in.

Matt is a brilliant GM and he's been crafting the world of Aerios for around 15 years now - it's the most fully formed fantasy world I've ever explored as a player. Far superior to any D20 tat (& I've played/run a LOT of D20 tat). You just can't beat a GM created setting.

It seems to me that the biggest drawback of Sim style play is the amount of prep time the GM needs to preserve the dream

Anyway, I'll resist the urge to post a blow by blow account of the game since I've got pages of notes on my own games I want to   post. Suffice to say we're only just chipping our way into the mass of backstory - though our PCs may have just triggered The Reformation of the orthodox Church of Dragos!

With such a Sim heavy game we needed to work out our Gamist cravings in another way so settled for a series of mock death matches between various PCs. I'll just mention that my 2nd level duellist Jaego managed to puncture the lungs of Jurgen a 6th level witch-hunter - sorry Dan! Gotta love rolling 66 for a crit...

For more on Aerios & WWC check out Matt's site (best in internet explorer) and  Col's animations lots of funky flash based fun!

Cheers,
JoE

[Mike Holmes]

Joe, sounds great. If you would be so kind, in what way do you find the Rolemaster system to support your sim play of the game? That is, how do you deal with mechanics in play? How much time do you spend with things like character maintenence? Do the players enjoy keeping the character sheets up to date, and watching the characters grow in terms of the detailed skill system? I assume that the crit charts are highly appreciated?

Mike

[Joe J Prince]

Hi Mike, thanks for your questions.

By my reckoning, Rolemaster has no mechanical support for addressing a literary premise and the randomness of the system (linear d100 rolls that can extend either way) makes it pretty hard to step-on-up effectively. That's why death matches are fun, but you'd be loathe to risk your character in-game in the same situation.
Case in point - Grant's death match consisted of him failing to spot an assassin for 3 rounds then taking a crossbow bolt through the head!

I think that RM supports sim play because of the genuine fear you feel for your characters. You can't hide behind a premise keeping your character alive and all the tactical planning and number crunching in the world won't protect you from a big fat E crit (essentially 50% chance of instant death, and the other options ain't pretty).
If it's what would happen in the world then bye-bye. Having said that a character hasn't died yet (although in-game events have taken my previous two characters out of the campaign). We hoard our fate points like the precious don't we precious.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by character maintenance, do you mean in-character role-playing and plots to keep us interested? There's loads of them - though mostly divorced from the RM system apart from XP rewards. Actually XP rewards are the RM system. Hmmm...

In terms of development of character effectiveness, yeah going up a level and the advancements it brings is a big deal, we've been playing for years and I've just this weekend hit lv 3! Which was cool, although I'd be just as keen to play if I hadn't gone up. Jaego is so kick-ass now, but prefers diplomacy or stealth above open combat. He used to have two ears.

Crit charts are either loved or hated depending which end of them you're on at any given time!
This to me seems the beauty/pitfall of sim play supported by RM.

Cheers,
Joe

[Mark Woodhouse]

At the risk of sounding contentious, can it really be that the way RM supports Sim is by refusing to let players pursue anything else with any chance of effectiveness? Weird.

I would have thought that the Sim-supporting elements were the level of fine, multi-scale detail (supporting exploration of system) and the "realism", supporting exploration of setting and situation. Coupled with the kind of fine-grained setting designs typical of RM (and apparently of Joe's game) and a fairly long character advancement cycle, this seems like a pretty good environment for getting GNS Sim play - but I wonder if there really is something to the idea that a ruleset needs to really foreclose G and N priorities in addition to supporting exploration well in order to support S?

[NN]

I don't think Rolemaster is really any less supportive of Gamism than D&D. Its just that the death spiral and the flukey mook danger mean you can't go on extended D&D style hackfests.  Also, the lethality of combat opens up the possibility of spectacular successes.  But then maybe this is because I get my gamist kicks from the Big Step-On-Up: Survival.

[Mike Holmes]

By my reckoning, Rolemaster has no mechanical support for addressing a literary premise and the randomness of the system (linear d100 rolls that can extend either way) makes it pretty hard to step-on-up effectively. That's why death matches are fun, but you'd be loathe to risk your character in-game in the same situation.

I think it's a valid argument. I've heard players say this a lot before. That is, they are strongly disincentivized from going willy-nilly into combat because no amount of good tactics can keep you from losing your character if you get unlucky. It's something that makes RM distinct from most editions of D&D (even the most recent ones with the crit rules still give the player the option to run in most cases).

Yes, you can do step on up with this, but only if you're willing to accept the loss of a character that takes a lot of effort to create and maintain. By maintenence I was refering, BTW, to the math and such that you have to do with leveling up (just out of curiosity, you use a spreadsheet, right? Nobody should have to do RM chargen and maintenence without one). For a lot of players what you get instead is a more simulationism sort of feel for the danger of combat.

That, of course, means that characters tend to avoid combat. Which could be seen as unheroic. I think in play that it's generally not a problem that way, however. I will say that at low levels, even later editions of RM like RMSS which try to give a bolster with things like "adolescent levels" still produce ridiculously inept characters. But there is a feeling of development that's explored through this. I've had players who really enjoyed this aspect. For these players, the joy of leveling up is not so much in that the character becomes more powerful, but that you get to alter the character in such a way that tracks the development in minute detail.

Though the tendency to ineptitude exists, it doesn't last forever with characters, and it's not so much that characters can't do anything that makes it support sim as that combat has special rules that make it particularly problematic. So it's the inability even of powerful characters to survive a lot of combat that gives the player a "realistic" feeling that they should avoid it. Other activities, however, players don't fear to approach. Even if they're not good at those things, the player won't lose their character for attempting oratory. When combat does inevitably occur, too, it's somewhat powerful, because you do watch your opponent's rolls or the GM for the outcome with trepidation. By exploring the mechanics here, you match your feelings to your character's.

I played a lot of RM, and though I find the system to have a lot of flaws, I do think that what it represents is an attempt to drift D&D to simulationism. What results is, I'd agree with others, an incoherent system to some extent, but one that seems to work relatively well for an incoherent system - most of the objections to the system are that the mechanics require a ton of math and chart lookups which are seen as work and not interesting play. Anyhow, largely my point is that the mechanics of the system support a certain style of simulationism play (even if it gets mixed up in gamism).

We hoard our fate points like the precious don't we precious.

Which edition are you playing? How do fate points work in your game?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by character maintenance, do you mean in-character role-playing and plots to keep us interested? There's loads of them - though mostly divorced from the RM system apart from XP rewards. Actually XP rewards are the RM system. Hmmm...

What I'm saying is that the push away from combat in RM does inform players that they're supposed to do "something else." This is actually pretty weak sim support in some ways. First, the combat rules beg to be used despite their lethality (gotta get to the crit charts!), which is what leads to Fate points in some games. This is further simulationism drift, because the idea is to have adventures that emulate the source material - meaning that don't constantly involve death (FP are even less gamism, because they are basically used to ameliorate losses in a Step On Up, as opposed to giving a player something to show off with). Secondly, it's only "staying out of the way" and doesn't provide a lot of other support, except as we've noted, in terms of the fun to be had when you advance levels.

In terms of development of character effectiveness, yeah going up a level and the advancements it brings is a big deal, we've been playing for years and I've just this weekend hit lv 3! Which was cool, although I'd be just as keen to play if I hadn't gone up. Jaego is so kick-ass now, but prefers diplomacy or stealth above open combat. He used to have two ears.

Try to be a little more precise about what you enjoy about leveling. Is it like I said above, that you get to see the character grow? Or is it enjoying seeing the character power up?

Crit charts are either loved or hated depending which end of them you're on at any given time!
This to me seems the beauty/pitfall of sim play supported by RM.

Could you talk more about the downside?

Mike

[Kesher]

Joe,

I'd also be interested in hearing you talk a bit about the actual process of gaining experience in your game; reward systems are tickling my mind these days, and integrated, Sim rewards are a bit of a mystery for me.  I've never played RM, but I've read the 2nd ed. rules and was fascinated to find that you actually gain experience simply for traveling across the landscape; a certain amt. of pts./ mile or something like that.  Does your group use rules like this? 

Also, how do you "fit" a fiat-type resource like Fate pts. into a Sim experience?  I know Sim doesn't equal Immersion, but doesn't a mechanic like that mess with the kind of randomness you mentioned as adding to the Sim feeling?

One more thing:  Would you say that the charts themselves are a type of out-of-world Color that feeds back into the "Simminess" of the whole thing?

Thanks,

Aaron

[kingreidos]

Ok - I'll answer these ones.  I'm the GM of the game "When Worlds Collide" that Joe has been talking about.  I've never written in the style of roleplay academia before so please forgive any glaring descriptive errors :-)



I'd also be interested in hearing you talk a bit about the actual process of gaining experience in your game; reward systems are tickling my mind these days, and integrated, Sim rewards are a bit of a mystery for me.  I've never played RM, but I've read the 2nd ed. rules and was fascinated to find that you actually gain experience simply for traveling across the landscape; a certain amt. of pts./ mile or something like that.  Does your group use rules like this? 

No we don't.  I've played Rolemaster for 15 years now and have realised a long time ago that it isn't a system but more like a list of options.  The system I use has grown from Rolemaster roots but is much much different from what you buy in the shops.  Almsot every aspect has been changed or modified to make it play quicker.  As for XPs the rolemaster system is rubbish.  I award XPs for roleplaying first and foremost and then award them for characters achieving their character goals (minor, medium, major catergories).  I also award Xps to characters who train or practice their skills.  A 10 minute recap at the end of a session usually does it and there are no looking up 'A crits suffered by level 5 from a level 15 character' tables!

Also, how do you "fit" a fiat-type resource like Fate pts. into a Sim experience?  I know Sim doesn't equal Immersion, but doesn't a mechanic like that mess with the kind of randomness you mentioned as adding to the Sim feeling?

The Sim feeling is maintained by limiting the power of Fate and assigning it to a stat (Intuition).  In my game a fate point doesn't erase what just happened, it merely lessens the consequences.  In the last game Coin a Plasma Wild Mage decided to drop his staff and wrestle an enraged Ra-ach (evil ram headed demon).  Suffice to safe he was horribly beaten and suffered a severed arm from its two handed axe!  He spent a fate to avoid instant death!  The axe didn't just miss: it hacked his arm and was stopped half way through the shoulder bone.  Coin after escaping had to then find healing before he slowly bled to death.  In the end he had to cauterise his own wound with Plasma!  He now has a bent arm and a horrible scar - so as you see 'fate' points used like this don't destroy the sense of danger!  Randomness is maintained because the result pretty much depends on waht mood I'm in, the flexibility in modifying the letahl event (e.g if the world explodes I'm afraid a fate point won't work), and to a lesser degree the In stat and the amount of fate left (the higher the luckier).


One more thing:  Would you say that the charts themselves are a type of out-of-world Color that feeds back into the "Simminess" of the whole thing?

Don't use charts, I assign a difficulty class like in D+D and then describe the result depending on the how near or far way the roll is from it.  Charts slow things down and stifle creativity - the GMs head should be the only chart needed ;-)


Hope this answers a few questions,
Matt

[Mike Holmes]

Cool, you drifted the rewards system very much like I did towards sim stuff. By awards for "roleplaying" I assume you mean for accurately portraying the character? Or entertainingly?

Very important question for me: do you "fudge" rules in the game? That is, do you regularly ignore rules if they don't somehow produce effects you like? Or do you work around the effects the system produces to create interesting play?

Mike

[Joe J Prince]

I think Matt answered most questions eloquently,

But here's my thoughts anyway

Cool, you drifted the rewards system very much like I did towards sim stuff. By awards for "roleplaying" I assume you mean for accurately portraying the character? Or entertainingly?

Yeah, accuracy vs entertainment is a difficult distinction to make but I think it's made easier in a sim based environment because the overlap is much greater. For coherent sim play, entertainment stems from accuracy in portraying what would really happen within the fantasy world conceptualised. So I think by "roleplaying" awards, Matt refers to embracing the dream  and enhancing it (to the best of a player's ability).

As far as the fudging issue goes - Matt's officially banned from admitting fudging any aspect of his game, even if he does...
No-one's taking the sim goodness away from me. :-)

Matt tends to run diceless until a conflict presents itself, then he considers the range of possible outcomes and lets the dice decide between them (after considering all input from roleplaying). He's pretty flexible and I believe he (rightly) considers the verisimilitude of the setting over and above any restraints of the system.

Does this amount to huge GM fiat? Well not really, since most exercise of GM fiat just reigns in the crunchy bits that go mental in any system with more than a couple of books.

What we end up with is a nicely streamlined sim aligned system which means you can level up within about 30 minutes (without a spreadsheet or ever having read the RM rules).

Regarding levelling up, it's really the statistical improvements which are interesting, because they are rare and increase effectiveness in a tangible way. Unlike character growth which occurs every time I play - but is less mechanically tangible.

On the downside of crit charts, I think the worst aspect is that a single unlucky roll can remove a character from a combat very early on - resulting in a bored player for the duration of the fight and for sometime afterward until their PC wakes up.

Cheers,
Joe

[Mike Holmes]

Yeah, accuracy vs entertainment is a difficult distinction to make but I think it's made easier in a sim based environment because the overlap is much greater. For coherent sim play, entertainment stems from accuracy in portraying what would really happen within the fantasy world conceptualised. So I think by "roleplaying" awards, Matt refers to embracing the dream  and enhancing it (to the best of a player's ability).

OK, so very sim in any case.

As far as the fudging issue goes - Matt's officially banned from admitting fudging any aspect of his game, even if he does...
No-one's taking the sim goodness away from me. :-)

OK, so the priority is, at least, that it appears that the system is working mechanically. If it isn't, then it's a problem with the system, not in terms of how you guys play, right?

Matt tends to run diceless until a conflict presents itself, then he considers the range of possible outcomes and lets the dice decide between them (after considering all input from roleplaying). He's pretty flexible and I believe he (rightly) considers the verisimilitude of the setting over and above any restraints of the system.

Does this amount to huge GM fiat? Well not really, since most exercise of GM fiat just reigns in the crunchy bits that go mental in any system with more than a couple of books.

This needs more clarification, which may be difficult because of the extent to which the system has been apparently hacked. But, generally, the rule is the GM makes up the contest, and then the dice decide the outcome? And the consideration on constructing the contest is on Verisimilitude?

What we end up with is a nicely streamlined sim aligned system which means you can level up within about 30 minutes (without a spreadsheet or ever having read the RM rules).

OK, that's definitely highly hacked, then. But the streamlining isn't done to avoid the mechanics, right? Simply to avoid the high work to output ratio that the game normally presents?

Regarding levelling up, it's really the statistical improvements which are interesting, because they are rare and increase effectiveness in a tangible way. Unlike character growth which occurs every time I play - but is less mechanically tangible.

So, then the fun of leveling up is the power? Looking forward to being more effective? Or is it merely in that you get to explore new things with the more powerful character?

On the downside of crit charts, I think the worst aspect is that a single unlucky roll can remove a character from a combat very early on - resulting in a bored player for the duration of the fight and for sometime afterward until their PC wakes up.

So it's a bad design because it tends to take characters away from players too often. What's the upside of the replacement system besides it being less likely to do this?

Mike

[Joe J Prince]

OK, so the priority is, at least, that it appears that the system is working mechanically. If it isn't, then it's a problem with the system, not in terms of how you guys play, right?

Yes, indeed. Although I'm not a hardcore simulationist by any stretch, I'll give any creative agenda a go, but it must be mechanically supported.

This needs more clarification, which may be difficult because of the extent to which the system has been apparently hacked. But, generally, the rule is the GM makes up the contest, and then the dice decide the outcome? And the consideration on constructing the contest is on Verisimilitude?

Please, modified, hacked sounds too brutal :-). Yes, to both points.

OK, that's definitely highly hacked, then. But the streamlining isn't done to avoid the mechanics, right? Simply to avoid the high work to output ratio that the game normally presents?

I don't think it's vastly modified, we still have development points for skill rank acquisition, fate point increases, HP increases, saving throw increases, OBs, DBs yadda yadda yadda. It's still distinctly Rolemaster.
But I think you are correct, the streamlining is intended primarily to avoid the high work to output ratio. However I'm not certain exactly how this is done - I only play the game but it still seems far more detailed than MERP.

So, then the fun of leveling up is the power? Looking forward to being more effective? Or is it merely in that you get to explore new things with the more powerful character?

The power is fun, but interestingly I think it's because with more power comes more effectiveness and therefore more freedom to explore. Threats which were certain death before are now merely almost certain death!

So it's a bad design because it tends to take characters away from players too often. What's the upside of the replacement system (for crit charts) besides it being less likely to do this?

Handling time is the only other big benefit I can think of.

Hope this answers some of your questions.
Cheers,
Joe

[Mike Holmes]

That does answer my questions pretty well, yes. Thanks.

Mike