Topic: Director's Briefing - 4th July 2012

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

This is the twelfth of our scheduled Briefings.

Now that there’s been a little bit of time for the ICE community to digest the news of our Rolemaster Briefing, this is a good juncture to answer at least some of the questions that people have been asking.

Qu 1: What is the status of the new unified Rolemaster products?

There’s been a lot of speculation about this. The facts are as follows – a complete draft of the new Arms Law has already arrived fresh from core playtesting to my inbox. Copies have been provided to selected individuals for their commentary and their independent second-round playtesting. The new Character Law and the new Spell Law will be the next to appear, but I don’t know which will materialise first. The fourth and fifth books, namely “Creatures” and “Treasures” will turn up last.

Qu 2: Is this a new edition of Rolemaster?

In some ways, it is a new edition. In some ways, it is very much a “best of” drawing upon the best ideas of the past three decades. It is not a cut-and-paste job. It is definitively and definitely Rolemaster.

The RPG industry and the hobby have been around a long time now with a myriad mechanics explored in games mainstream and indie. For a game to survive and to flourish, it needs quality and stability in order to attract and maintain the interest of players and GMs, and it needs to be supported by its publisher.

Of course you as fans have to give unified Rolemaster a chance and support it in turn as that support enables us to produce more products for it, encourages software creators to develop high-quality virtual tabletops and support tools, and so on. Living, growing rpg systems attract more players and GMs, which means more opportunities for existing gamers to find new folk to game with. A win for everyone.

Qu 3: What happens next? How can I become a playtester?

After the first three of the vanguard products have arrived and have survived my editorial scrutiny and that of our specialist commentators, we will then make them available for a public beta playtest. The expectation is that this public beta test will kick off in August. Copies of the drafts will be available for purchase in minimalist formatting from the OneBookShelf network and paid-up beta testers will be able to comment and discuss their playtesting results on the ICE forums.

This will be a strictly time-limited beta test and it will end once our crack team of artists have finished the illustrations and covers, so that final editing and layout can occur. Anyone who purchases a beta version of one of the new books will be able to update their pdf copy at no extra cost to the release version as soon as they become available. PDF release of the final versions will be followed by print-on-demand and mainstream distribution.

We are determined that unified Rolemaster will be the best it can possibly be. With the feedback from the community, we are certain that together we can create a new edition of Rolemaster that will stand the test of time and be a new classic.

Qu 4: Why five books? Why not one?

Our assessment is that while many fans would like an introductory, lightweight or streamlined version of Rolemaster in one book, many more will want a full-blooded, full-featured version of Rolemaster. From the publishing perspective that we want to support Rolemaster through new Shadow World and Cyradon material and adventure/campaign modules, we need the complete unified Rolemaster now.

There will be a “Lite” one book edition of Rolemaster in due course, but it will be fully compatible with the full version. It will not be a conflicting or variant edition – the voice of the community is very clear that multiple competing editions are a major problem.

Qu 5: So what is happening with Shadow World?

Shadow World will continue to be the premier fantasy setting for Rolemaster, and there will be a Rolemaster Handbook for Shadow World that provides the necessary additional rules material (e.g. Loremaster and Navigator spell lists) for gaming in the perilous lands of Kulthea. Depending on when Terry finishes his latest masterwork, Emer III, this may become one of the first sourcebooks to be a unified Rolemaster product. What is certain is that new Shadow World material beyond Emer III and books written by third-party authors will be written for unified Rolemaster. In addition, we will be updating and refreshing existing sourcebooks such as Emer I, Emer II, Eidolon, Cloudlords of Tanara, and more, to be compatible with the new Rolemaster.

As an aside, there will also be a HARP Handbook for Shadow World.

Qu 6: What about Cyradon?

In addition to being the premier setting for HARP Fantasy, we will be providing a unified Rolemaster conversion of Cyradon, enabling future Cyradon products to support both HARP Fantasy and Rolemaster gaming. Once again, this will not be a variant of unified Rolemaster; it will be a straightforward conversion with appropriate additional material.

Qu 7: Is a new version of Spacemaster being worked? Will Spacemaster be unified?

Spacemaster is not currently being worked on. There are limits to how much even our teams of freelancers can cope with at the same time. But in due course, there will be a unified version of Spacemaster and it will be compatible with the new unified Rolemaster. Meanwhile we are continuing with our rebranding and rerelease of the existing Privateers line – five of the seven books are now available on the OneBookShelf network.

Qu 8: What’s happening with the HARP Fantasy line?

It’s full steam ahead for the HARP Fantasy line. As I write this, I have an email from Eric with the latest complete HARP Fantasy draft layout and covers to review. I finished all of the extra material for Martial Law and so it is ready to hand over to Eric. Virtually all of the new artwork for HARP College of Magics is already here.

We don’t see HARP Fantasy/HARP SF as rivals to Rolemaster/Spacemaster but rather complementary systems addressing different gaming needs and this will become more obvious as new products are developed and released. Due to the larger pool of freelancers that GCP is able to draw upon, we have the capability to maintain a stream of substantial products for multiple lines at the same time and this keeps everyone in the community happy.

The next scheduled Director’s Briefing will be in early August, but I expect to be announcing the release of HARP Fantasy in the interim. 

Best wishes,
Nicholas

Director, Guild Companion Publications Ltd. 

[TAK]

Thanks for the info, that answered a lot of my questions.

I did come up with one new one; the old SW books that will be stated for RMU, will the stats be free or will you have to buy the PDFs to get them?

Mainly asking because I own a lot of the print versions and while I like supporting my favorite company, it feels like a waste to buy the PDFs.

Even if the stats would be available as a cheap pack of some kind would be better.

[Byth]

I have a question about Qu 8

If Harp Fantasy and Harp Scifi aren't in competiton with a unified Rolemaster and upcoming unified Spacemaster I would really appreciate a more clearer explanation of what the differences are, is one line more complex, what ?

I would assume that if someone has come up with this idea of unifiying these old versions at the risk of distracting away from what the Harp lines could have been seen as,  a more playable and easier unifying version of what has come before of Rolemaster and Spacemaster, why do this and add yet another version of Rolemaster and Spacemaster.....it seems perplexing.

And just to clarify I'm not a diehard fan of Harp but felt this latest turn of events strange to me

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

At one level, it is about detail. HARP & HARP SF have much less detail, much less granularity than Rolemaster and Spacemaster. For instance, skills in HARP/HARP SF cost either 2 DPs or 4 DPs, skills in Rolemaster have a much greater variation allowing more nuanced professions.

At another level, it is about game-play. HARP & HARP SF have potentially faster game-play than Rolemaster and Spacemaster. For instance, combat in HARP/HARP SF is one roll resolution (unless you fumble) whereas combat in Rolemaster/Spacemaster is attack roll then critical roll.

At a third level, it is about design, modularity and options. HARP & HARP SF are complete games in one/two volumes (sf always takes more room), Rolemaster and Spacemaster can be done in single volumes but there are always sacrifices that have to be made to accomplish this or you need really massive products. HARP & HARP SF are designed to be expanded with optional extensions, Rolemaster and Spacemaster are more modular and have more options built into even their core systems.

At a fourth level, HARP & HARP SF will be making real the high adventure in their names, Rolemaster & Spacemaster always have an eye to putting more of the illusion of realism into the drama of the game.

That's some quick scribblings on the differences.

Best wishes,
Nicholas

[Byth]

Nicholas,

Appreciate the quick response and I guess I already knew the answer at a instinct level but just wanted to confirm it in case I was missing something.

For my part I was an avid RM, RM2, SM2 for years, even converting to RMFRP, skipping RMSS and ran some SM Privateers so I feel experienced enough to be able to put forward my views from not only as a player but as a GM/Referee/Sy Ops.  I've played the game systems as a young man and continuing on tried to keep in touch as a father while dabbling with such vivid graphical temptations as online gaming and other similar distractions. 

For me I think I'll stick with the speedier HARP SciFi, it suit my present needs and I can then concentrate abit more on background of the stories and the setting my players skip through. When we've looked back on previous adventures while the odd crit or fumble comes to mind usually its the stories and the moments and characters/npcs in them that stand out the most.

Best Regards and appreciate the focus you've helped bring back to the game system.    

[markc]

I have a question about Qu 8

If Harp Fantasy and Harp Scifi aren't in competiton with a unified Rolemaster and upcoming unified Spacemaster I would really appreciate a more clearer explanation of what the differences are, is one line more complex, what ?

I would assume that if someone has come up with this idea of unifiying these old versions at the risk of distracting away from what the Harp lines could have been seen as,  a more playable and easier unifying version of what has come before of Rolemaster and Spacemaster, why do this and add yet another version of Rolemaster and Spacemaster.....it seems perplexing.

And just to clarify I'm not a diehard fan of Harp but felt this latest turn of events strange to me

 Welcome to the ICE forums. And great questions.
MDC

[windmarkbob]

I effin' love the concept of a "unified Rolemaster."  Will the rules for this new, upgraded system come with *simple* instructions for converting the older RMC and RMFRP characters for use in the new system?

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

I effin' love the concept of a "unified Rolemaster."  Will the rules for this new, upgraded system come with *simple* instructions for converting the older RMC and RMFRP characters for use in the new system?

Thank you for reminding me. We will need to do that.

Best wishes,
Nicholas

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

Thanks for the info, that answered a lot of my questions.

I did come up with one new one; the old SW books that will be stated for RMU, will the stats be free or will you have to buy the PDFs to get them?

Mainly asking because I own a lot of the print versions and while I like supporting my favorite company, it feels like a waste to buy the PDFs.

Even if the stats would be available as a cheap pack of some kind would be better.

This may well depend on how quickly experts/writers in the new rules can be "trained up" and set to work on converting existing stat blocks. We need to get the new Rolemaster rules completed, then the Shadow World specific rules written, then get folk doing the conversion work.

Best wishes,
Nicholas

[arcadayn]

Thanks for the update, Nicholas.  It answered all of my questions and has me super stoked for August!  I'm going to have to start recruiting a play test group on G+.

[Inez Hull]

I'm hoping there will be some polling of rules preferences and presentation of new rules to the Rolemaster community. I think WotC's approach to D&D Next is a good model if you are hoping to unify the fanbase, although a playtest on that scope will obviously be too hard. In fact following D&DN's core + modules approach would be a really good fit for Rolemaster, allowing individual groups to dial the level of complexity and edition specific rules preferences.

[Usdrothek]

Isnt "core +optional modules" how we got into the whole RM2 power creep issue?

A new unified version should be complete, as is.

[Fenrhyl Wulfson]

RMSS and RMFRP had companions too and there wasn’t any power creep issues. Maybe some imbalances there and then but nothing a good GM couldn’t deal with.
Their goal was clearly to expand the game, not give more power to the players.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Yes, adding options onto a core system has to be done carefully to avoid creep/bloat in all its forms. If it's done at all.

But let's say for the sake of argument that you don't do it at all, and the core system is it, except perhaps for adventures and world-specific things for Shadow World and Cyradon.

Wouldn't you lose the modularity of ICE games, the ability to tweak the system to fit whatever the individual GM's world concept happens to be? Dunno about you, but that right there is what makes RM and HARP worth playing IMO, the fact that we can make it our game instead of ICE's. Your game isn't the same as mine, and that's as it should be.

Is that worth it? Personally, I'd rather just go carefully and accept the risk.

[jdale]

RMSS and RMFRP had companions too and there wasn’t any power creep issues. Maybe some imbalances there and then but nothing a good GM couldn’t deal with.
Their goal was clearly to expand the game, not give more power to the players.

I think they did a good job with new classes, training packages, and spell lists. I would hope that skills are kept to a minimum because here is a place that complexity can creep up on you if you aren't paying attention, especially for arms-race type skills (e.g. mental assault and mental defense).

The martial arts companion in particular made some fairly deep changes, which I thought were good for the most part but I would like to see some of those become core. (E.g. very different handling of adrenal defense and martial arts ranks.)

Whereas, say, the Channeling Companion was full of good ideas but there is nothing in it that makes you feel like you need to go back and rework existing characters.

[gandalf970]

I feel a good solid set of core rules would be fantastic.  Then true to Rolemasters past add in some optional rules, for the UNIFIED SYSTEM.  Just rewriting the material and putting it all in an easy to find place will make it a vast improvement.

Let's face it, this community understands modularity and options as do most gamers.  if there is something we don't like, we just change it to something that fits our group.  Without a doubt I can bet 90% of the people coming from this community will mod the Unified System.

There is always going to be things that we don't like about any system, but Rolemaster had most of what I liked so that is why I modded it to my groups taste. 

I am super psyched about the new version and have already let my players know that the existing campaign will go on hiatus once this is released.  They are excited as well, since most of us have been playing Rolemaster for 20+ years and hands down it is the game of choice for the type of group we have.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Let's face it, this community understands modularity and options as do most gamers.  if there is something we don't like, we just change it to something that fits our group.  Without a doubt I can bet 90% of the people coming from this community will mod the Unified System.

Exactly. Probably a big chunk of the reason that 90% still plays RM, HARP or both is because they're pretty much designed to be modified. "Tweakable" is baked in. If that doesn't remain the same in new products, those new products will have a different kind of customer base. You may add some people, but you'll lose some, too.

If the idea that "tweakability is built into the core mechanics" is inherent in the new products, then "optional rules" become examples approved by the writers of the core mechanics of how to tweak the system while retaining the same game balance. Or ways to tweak the system specifically to change the game balance in a defined manner.

Not that those will be the only possible ways, that's not the point. The point is to illustrate how small changes can have broad effects, and how to get from A to B without wrecking your game.

No?

[pastaav]

Isnt "core +optional modules" how we got into the whole RM2 power creep issue?

Actually I don't think we did. It was more...this is optional thus we don't need to playtest it or look into if it is dustruptive with other optional rules.

[GrumpyOldFart]

There probably needs to be a distinction made between "optional but playtested" and "interesting idea that hasn't been checked yet."

[Kristen Mork]

There probably needs to be a distinction made between "optional but playtested" and "interesting idea that hasn't been checked yet."

Having met some of the numbered Companion authors, I think many of the rules were playtested, but only by the authors.  Their games and my games don't look very similar so rules that made perfect sense to them would break my games.  Thus, we need a more rigorous: "optional, but playtested by multiple independent groups."