1
Rolemaster / Re: The problems with the "flesh golem"
« Last post by pastaav on Today at 07:54:41 AM »The classic Fleshgolem monster from fantasy is very different from Frankenstyle monsters. That there might be stiches needed to large enough pile of substance for the golem magic to work, does not mean it has the same movement of combat potential as an "artificial man".
Another classic golem are Sand golems and they are obviously created from lots of distinct materials so the definition in RMU need to be improved. Sand golems does not actually exist in previous editions of RM...but Flesh golems do. Why are we even talking abour D&D when previous editions of RM did have Flesh golems?
Having the situation that RMU rules/spells can not recreate monsters from previous editions because other games have done something similar would be dead stupid IMHO.
Another classic golem are Sand golems and they are obviously created from lots of distinct materials so the definition in RMU need to be improved. Sand golems does not actually exist in previous editions of RM...but Flesh golems do. Why are we even talking abour D&D when previous editions of RM did have Flesh golems?
Having the situation that RMU rules/spells can not recreate monsters from previous editions because other games have done something similar would be dead stupid IMHO.