No April Fools

I never participated in April Fool's Day, as society constantly lies the other 364 days of the year; why do we need a special day to do it again? I view this as an "Internet Vacation Day" since I'm cautious about the information I read online, so I take the day off from my sources and step away from it all.

Additionally, all the April Fools' stories persist for a week or more, allowing confusion and misinformation to linger online and contribute to the chaos that defines our age. The holiday used to be a fun surprise, but these days, most of what we read is carefully crafted misinformation and deliberate omissions. Just look at any Wall Street company's quarterly reports.

Gotcha stories these days don't make me laugh; I just feel that the whole day ends up being wasted time and brings more confusion. What we need is a Day of Truth. Then again, who can say what that is anymore?

The best I can do is to avoid contributing to it and refrain from consuming it.

ADAD vs. DCC

Of the two games competing for my time, Dungeon Crawl Classics and Adventures Dark and Deep are my favorites. DCC is designed in the typical 3.5E style: Give the players toys, silly powers, and lots of funny dice, and watch them cause havoc and panic while trying to avoid dying. The whole design theory of "classes give the players table toys" is embraced by this game, and this is a classic 3.5E design style.

Is DCC a serious game? It can be, but for the most part, it is embracing the mantra of old-school gaming while standing on the back of a pterodactyl while shooting a las-rifle at rampaging muck men. DCC is always supposed to be over the top on the player side, and also how deadly the dungeons are. Forget a poison needle on a treasure chest; a swarm of flesh-devouring beetles comes out of the chest; save or be left a kneeling skeleton with lockpicks still in your hands.

ADAD hits differently. I sit here in front of giant tomes of knowledge, like fate has bestowed two mighty spell books into my possession, letting them rest on the table before me, and it is up to me to unlock their secrets. Characters don't get toys; they have tools. You are judging your weight allowance. You are kitting out your equipment. You don't have a "class toy" that will kill those goblins on the road ahead; you have limited resources and the choice to wade in and fight, avoid them, or deal with them another way. Spells are to be saved as a last resort, and magic is not used flippantly.

If there is one thing about D&D 4E and 5E that ruined gaming for me, it is those "infinite use" powers and spells that trivialize magic. I imagine a "Street Fighter" character infinitely casting fireballs or Hadouken, summoning forth "fire fist magic" with no cost or care. You could use this power at a restaurant to open a ketchup bottle. Cheap and easy magic ruins the magic, the world, the characters, and the game.

I don't know what those "always on" powers are, but they ain't magic. They are VFX, CGI, fake and dumb-looking. It is "empowerment" minus the power.

Magic assumes something is mysterious, has a price to pay, and is not well-understood.

DCC gives me that with its unpredictability.

ADAD gives me that with its scarcity.

Especially if you play "the spell game" in ADAD, where spell scrolls are not free, easy to find, buyable in shops, and freely traded. A fireball scroll? Spells and that knowledge locked in them are power, and wizards will not "pass that around" freely. There are no "public universities" with "free spells" to walk in and copy into your spellbook. If you find a rare and unique spell in a dungeon, you can trade that for something you want (if you can find someone to deal with), or you can keep that spell for yourself.

Imagine a world where anyone can buy a fireball scroll. Magic is power. Power is not handed around freely. Kingdoms, wizards, magic orders, and every other group would horde scrolls and spells to control these powers for their benefit. Just like today. Power must be tightly controlled and doled out to advance the group's aims, goals, and control of the world.

Even clerics should not be given the whole spell list for which to pray. You find a temple, serve them well, and then are granted access to the fonts of knowledge on how to pray for a new power or two. In every prayer, you need to learn to receive the blessing. A temple may be small and not have higher-level powers locked away; you need to seek a larger one. You may be given quests or expected to give tithes. Clerics learn their spells, too. There are pecking orders and hierarchies of the faithful in churches. Prove your faith in your god.

The whole assumption spells are like MMO powers and given to you when your character "dings" and levels up is another stupid trope of modern gaming.

The "video-gamification" of D&D has been going on since D&D 3.5E, and it sucks. I will play video games to get that hit, not tabletop games. Putting the rules before your world is lame, and it is another power grab by game designers away from referees, placing that power in a book and set of rules instead of a story and a world a group creates together.

"But the book says I get all these powers for free!"

Beware of those games. They take power away from your characters, referee, and group. They make every character in the world the same. That is real power if my wizard is the only one in 500 miles with a fireball scroll. If every wizard gets "fireball for free," there is no power or ownership of something unique or rare. For clerics, your faith may not be large enough to have powers above level 5, so you must help establish temples, seek ancient knowledge from similar lost gods, and build your church among people of the land.

Modern games divorce your character from the setting and story of the world. You are married to the rules and the game designer's whims. They take power away from you by pretending to give it to everyone for free.

ADAD is the real thing, where part of your character's story is acquiring knowledge, wealth, and power. None of this is given to you for free. You may have a few spells or a good to-hit, but most of your decision-making is driven by the story versus what you feel you are capable of, minus any notion of turn-based abilities or encounter powers that require short rests.

My ranger has no spells, just a sword and a limited quiver of arrows.

My fighter is a high AC and has a ton of hit points.

My magic user and cleric have a few spells saved for the right moment.

My thief is skilled, and those come up when I need them.

I am not thinking of feats, subclass powers, cantrips, short rest powers, or looking through my character sheet to "find something to do" on a turn. In DCC, I am sort of doing that at a lower level, like my fighter's "mighty deeds" die, but I prefer that "mighty deeds die" to anything that 5E offers me since it is designed as a "fun old-school themed mechanic" instead of a "character sheet lock in" one. DCC is very pulp and action-oriented, which appeals to me.

With ADAD, I have very little of that "character sheet interference" in my thoughts and actions. What I do is almost entirely controlled by my character and their motivations. This is a much more serious and gritty mechanic, harkening back to the days when rules were not as important as they are today.

DCC is my 3.5E game. It is also a direct replacement for 5E.

And ADAD is my 1e game.

Cepheus Universal

The more I read Cepheus Universal, the more I like it.

It is not as generous with skills as other Cepheus games, but this fits better with the original little black book games and how those were. You don't have a hit point or stamina pool that rapidly regenerates; there are no advantage dice mechanics and no talents.

The only modern mechanic they include is an optional experience system that allows for slow progression. Still, there is a warning against letting this take over the game, and it can also be burned in-game as a heroic luck system. Everyone having +4 skills and a 12 in their key ability scores will blow out a carefully balanced 2d6 game, so I see why the warnings are there.

You can always port traits from the other Cepheus games if you like.

The entire tone of the CU game is hard science fiction, cyberpunk, military, survival, and inspiration from movies and fiction. This is not "generic Traveller-like" gaming that seeks to reproduce a generic Imperium-like game; this is a game that wants to emulate any story in any science-fiction genre. There are detailed survival rules and support for lower-technology levels, such as fantasy or Age of Sail. We also have good rules for post-apocalyptic settings, hacking, clones, genetic modifications, cyborgs, robots, AI, and even time travel.

If your game goes into "hardcore planetary survival," and characters are making bows to replace their drained laser pistols, the game goes there.

If your game is Cyberpunk meets Traveller, with a layer of Blade Runner replicants thrown in, the game goes there.

It will go there if your game is TL16 "Federation Space Navy" with ship transporters, ship officers, and multi-setting phase pistols.

The game goes there if your game is "Galactic rebels and space knights with TL14 force swords" versus an evil empire.

If you want "space truckers or marines versus evil space bugs," the game goes there.

If you want "space armies with machine guns versus hordes of hive-mind bug monsters," the game goes there.

Do you want classic serials like Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon? Do you like 1960s trippy, humorous, avant-garde science fiction? Woody Allen, Spaceballs, or Barbarella? The game goes there; turn on heroic mode and let yourself laugh.

A "Massive Effect" style of space troubleshooter and authorized space marshal game? It works.

CU also has mechs and vehicle combat, which is another genre covered.

A "Galaxy Guardians" style of renegade space heroes game who fight mighty space overlords? It works; just add licensed music that hits those nostalgia notes and turn on heroic mode.

Want "Lost Land of Pre-Historia" or "Dinosaur Park? Pick up a copy of Westlands (or Sword of Cepheus) and use the dinosaurs in those games. Anytime you mix technology and fantasy elements in a game, Cepheus will handle this far better than a d20 game.

Do you want "cyborg cops" versus criminals? The genres this game emulates go on and on.

The game even has "heroic play mode" rules, where NPCs are rarely hit, most enemies are one-hit mooks, player characters have a "luck pool" that absorbs damage, and players have a pool of destiny dice to add to failed rolls. Instead of writing the base rules as a "gimme 5E" game design of high player power, the game keeps the default realistic level of play and offers heroic play as a toggle. It has an Alien level of realism by default, but you can turn on that pulp "Star Wars" style of play with a toggle.

Again, the systems in this game are well thought out and designed.

The rules seem tested and battle-hardened. Compared to the ship combat examples in Cepheus Deluxe EE, this game requires far fewer dice rolls (not one per weapon mount per turn, which can get super annoying), and a layer of abstraction has been added to this system, which makes it feel better put together. Capital ships have a layer of abstraction added to them but can still interact with "adventure class ships," which also feels right.

The game also keeps the "hull size to drive" ratio concept of the original Traveller, where the smaller ships are limited in how fast they can accelerate and how long they can jump. You aren't going to do "far reaches" exploration missions in a battleship. Jump-6 stops at 1,200 tons, and jump-5 stops at 1,800 tons. Jump-4 is a maximum of 3,000 tons, while jump-2 is all a 5,000-ton ship can manage. You can limit capital ships to jump-2 as well if you would like.

The colossal problem the original High Guard book for Traveller had was opening up 6G acceleration and jump-6 to battleships. It broke the original game, and we played it before it came out, and it was a different world. There was a size limit on ships, and the big ships could not go that fast or far. You would not see a massive ship in a system 4 parsecs away from anything because it could never have the jump range to get there. No " battleships are sitting in the middle of nowhere" unless something in the system built it and stayed only in the system. Smaller ships could always outrun the larger ones, given that you mounted enough maneuver drives on them.

Also, with hyperdrives, jump-6 will eat up 60% of your tonnage as fuel for one jump. You can jump that far, but will you really need to? Trade-offs must be made.

Smaller ships going faster and farther is a "pro-player" design choice. Smaller starships and crews will do the critical things. Owning a small, capable, fast ship and having a skilled crew will get you more jobs than you can handle, whatever you do.

No game has done this much science fiction since the original Space Opera game, and Cepheus Universal does it better. There is one set of rules that covers everything, and you can mix and put all your science fiction in a blender if you like and play that. Mix "Trek and Wars" and play it out. Science fiction is supposed to be fun. Or serious. Or whatever you want it to be.

Cepheus Universal is this generation's Space Opera.

Also, how many 5E Kickstarter projects will I need to pay for to get games that cover all this? The worst part about the 5E market is the grift, book after book, to get the game to cover everything you want. Many games copy an inspiration closely; that is all you can do with it. Or they leave out key details, like the economics of space travel, trade, starship costs, or even star travel. Can we make money running cargo? The game doesn't know, and it implies neither should you. It is the sign of an idea they never thought about or purposefully left out of the game and never told buyers about it. Some games have ship combat with a few sample ships but leave out ship design. In other games, you can tell they never tested sections of the rules, and they just "wrote it and shipped it."

This is not the case in most of the Cepheus games. CU goes the extra mile to ensure that it tests and delivers significant systems before they are included in the book.

Why not use GURPS?

The ship combat and design here are better, faster, and more manageable. It is all abstracted to a level where the action can be handled quickly and stays in the story. Cepheus Universal quickly handles it in a rules-light format, using 2d6 for everything. The characters are better in GURPS, but how well the system runs and handles a wide variety of science fiction subjects, technology, and topics quickly and with a degree of detail and certainty will be by Cepheus Universal.

CU is far easier for ship, vehicle, and mech design than GURPS.

Why not use Cepheus Deluxe EE? In all honesty, you can. You can port in the trait and experience systems. Use the tables. It all works together. CU is twice the size, with more subjects and topics covered. CU has many fixes and improvements. The CD game is faster, looser, and has a more modern set of rules - that may appeal to some, especially coming from 5E.

The CD game has some nice rules and sections for speculative cargo and passengers, so the tables from one game can help the other. In CU, they aggregate this into one value per ton and roll to keep cargo hauling simple (and free from exploiting the system). Either game you choose is good; my preferences naturally go towards a game that can simulate more.

CU goes back to the basics in some ways, especially with characters. Less complicated characters are a good thing. Where they keep characters simple, they deliver genre support and a width of science fiction content that makes my head spin.

This is a fantastic game, easily S-Tier, and it can be easily overlooked unless you read it and carefully consider what it offers.

Off the Shelf: Cepheus Deluxe & Universal

Cepheus Universal (CU) is the better seller, but nothing beats my B&W hardcover of Cepheus Deluxe Expanded Edition (CD). Both are essentially the same game, with CU being the "more stuff" version, but CD perfectly balances what the game offers and what I am looking for.

The art is not the best, and the color books are harsh on the eyes. I do not like this trend of color books on poor-quality paper at DriveThruRPG, and my full-color CD EE book has sort of "dried up," and the pages feel like crinkly cardboard. This is likely too much ink on the page and how it dries after a few years. I live in a dry climate, too.

There is an option for a B&W hardcover for Cepheus Deluxe; go for that. My B&W copy has lasted well, is easy on the eyes, and the pages are as good as new. Still, I would like a classy B&W book version without the silly striped borders and with cleaned-up art and presentation. If it looks like OG Traveller, you have my eyes.

B&W is great for OSR games; it is cheaper, looks classy, and lasts longer than the color printings on the paper DTRPG prints. CU only has color with no B&W option (Lulu.com), but the paper quality is better.

So why pull this one from storage and give it another look?

CD is the best sandbox sci-fi game I have. The only other game that comes close is Stars Without Number, better for generating factions and planetary points of interest. Still, the CD game has campaign support for cargo, random tables of spacer-related activities, sample ships, and generic science fiction campaign support in the classic 2d6 style. I would still use SWN as a resource but CD as the engine.

The CD game also has a character and ship sheet on Roll20, which fits my "going digital" strategy nicely. Ever since I went fully digital, I have had no need for large tables with maps, and I play my games more with my virtual games tucked away and always ready for me to resume.

I know, "going digital" sounds like the antithesis of classic gaming. Using a VTT for solo play sounds like a surrender. It is not. For me, it is a space, cleanliness, and organizational issue. With limited space, I only want my shelves to hold the best games I will ever play. I don't wish to have maps, figures, pawns, or other figures collecting dust.

The book's digital character sheet, VTT support on Roll20, and extensive campaign support are some of the best "game loops" in science fiction gaming, especially for solo play.

Why not Traveller? There are two reasons. The Traveller game has gotten too big, and I don't want the Imperium setting. I like generic sci-fi, and with Traveller, I am removing more Imperium than adding my stuff. The Traveller universe is still a top-tier setting, but it is not the right fit for the game I am working on. It is a great game with a vast library; I am just not inspired to run it all.

Other games, like HARP SF, don't fill the need. They are character and combat games, but they don't give me the "other cool stuff to do" that CD provides. Even Stars Without Number gives me more and retains B/X compatibility, too, so I can reskin monsters. I like HARP SF, but this game does not fit my ideas for my next game.

Lots of science fiction games drop the ball at starship design and combat. Cepheus Deluxe (and Traveller) does not and excels in both areas. Stars Without Number also does a good job.

Cepheus Universal is a great alternative or companion book. Regarding character development and skills, it is more like OG's "little black books," whereas Cepheus Deluxe is a bit more generous (on skills and advancement) and has a talent system.

The CD system is more of a pick-up-and-play science fiction game, with a few modern twists, like advantages and disadvantages on rolls (3d6, use two highest or lowest). The CD system also uses a "hit point" system with stamina (damaged first, heals fully in 10 minutes) and lifeblood (damaged after stamina is depleted, heals slowly). If total damage is less than half lifeblood, that will heal with a day's rest. The CD system is very "5E" with its damage and recovery rules but has realism applied to severe wounds.

The CD system is more of a "lightweight, generic, 2d6 sci-fi game" with more generous character systems. The ship's maximum size is 10,000 tons, so the scope is smaller.

CU is more hardcore; characters rarely change, and it is more of a hard science fiction game. The wounding rules are more like your typical 2D6 science fiction OG game, with the depletion of END first, followed by STR or DEX. Healing is still on the generous side for gameplay purposes but still has a layer of realism where it takes more time to heal. CU has way more gear and equipment, and the book is 456 pages (compared to CD EE at 219 pages).

CU also has a cyberpunk feel and supports abstracted adventure and capital ships. This means it could be used to play a Star Wars or Star Trek-type game without too much trouble, so its scope is more extensive. The ship combat system is easier in CU than in CE, with far fewer rolls and attacks grouped and rolled for as one. In CE, every weapon is rolled for every turn, and comparing the starship combat examples is eye-opening.

CD EE is a worthy, lighter-fare modern science fiction game.

CU is the hard-science, more complete, science fiction "space opera" game.

The Rich Have Taken Over D&D

I see a lot of this new-style D&D art, you know, the modern-looking, overly flamboyant, cosplay-style costumes that are so prevalent in fantasy art these days. It is as if the chainmail bikini has evolved into the flashy, stylistic armor styles inspired by anime, where a shoulder pad is more prominent than half of the character's torso, and only one is worn. Additionally, numerous flashy pirate and Victorian styles are incorporated, enough to make Steampunk cosplayers cringe.

None of it is armor. It is all faux-dungeon fashion.

And I remember the old D&D.

It was a suit of realistic chainmail, or a thief in a rugged leather vest. Ordinary plate armor. Gritty and rugged individuals who likely did not have a choice, or poverty was so endemic that crawling in a 700-year-old hole in the ground looking for coins was the best way to cheat a feudal system where you were likely dead by your late 30s. This was the only way to get ahead without being forced to drag a hoe through a field for potatoes and crop yields that barely reached sustenance level.

Back in the day, D&D was a blue-collar experience.

The art was very 'common person' and elevated the ordinary into the realms of the fantastical.

Everyone looked like they didn't want to be there, and no one had armor tailors.

These days, D&D, dungeon-ing, and adventuring feel like a hobby of the idle rich. Everyone in modern art appears to be happy, well-dressed, stylish, and good-looking. I feel a nausea coming on when I watch a reality TV show featuring a crowd of 'perfect people' selected for their stylistic traits and good looks. Living mannequins.

Everyone starts as a fantastic, stylized, powerful hero with a perfectly tailored set of armor that has a unique style (likely copied from anime, but as stale as three-day-old sushi), and they look... rich.

Everyone in the new games looks rich, fat, happy, well-fed, beautiful, handsome, overly made up, and like hand-picked contestants from a reality show. They all have perfect, brightly dyed, modern hairstyles, as if they had just visited the salon before embarking on a "little jaunt" to the Tomb of Horrors to test their magic and combat skills.

They all appear to be fake social media influencers putting on an act.

Death isn't even a fear for them.

These people are nothing like me, nor do I have anything in common with them. The art feels like an "in crowd" of lifestyle influencers who don't want rabble to be a part of their exclusive club. This attitude seeps into groups and live streamers, the "better than you" culture that tells others, "unless you are good-looking and popular, the game isn't for you."

I recall the days when playing D&D automatically assumed you were considered unattractive and unpopular. We were the nerds who played out of our notebooks in school, and the rulebooks were three-hole punched so we could hide them in our Trapper Keepers. Teachers would take the books from you.

D&D, back in my school days, was a subversive revolution. We played in secret, out of sight of the teachers, and a few kids had to hide the fact that they played from their religious parents. Some kids used the numbered counters in a cup because special dice would be a dead giveaway, or teachers would think they were gambling. Real sets of dice were kept hidden, and two of the six-sided dice were always pulled out of the Monopoly game.

These days?

D&D has been taken over by the wannabe influencers and those who pretend to be rich to gain followers. Even their characters reflect this attitude. It would not surprise me if they had livestreaming rules in the new games, allowing followers to watch along as they embark on their incredible adventures.

Oh, wait, we have a game that does that. This is a good game because it acknowledges the stupidity and embraces the concept. It is a parody of what D&D and modern fantasy gaming have become.

Celebrity livestreaming.

For a lifestyle brand.

Fantasy That Doesn't Know What It Is

The argument that most any version of D&D "doesn't know what it is" is valid, and this has been true since the first edition. We have always felt AD&D was a mash-up of a few different fantasy genres, Tolkien and many Appendix N others, and the game "was its own genre."

Every version of AD&D and D&D was like this, and the "what it was" permanently changed at the company's whim. The first edition is the game's purest form, incorporating wargaming and Appendix N. The second was a role-playing game based on the NYT Bestseller novels. The third was "Magic: The Gathering D&D." The fourth was World of Warcraft, the tabletop game. The fifth Edition was the "we're sorry" edition, which went back to basics but made the game into a rules-focused superhero ARPG. Clones of D&D were one step removed. They still didn't know what genre they belonged to, except for "Not from Wizards."

In a sense, the game is "what you make of it."

It isn't anything, really, like a box of action figures and toy vehicles isn't anything.

Some games offer a generic framework for various worlds. Other games offer a generic version of a specific world. GURPS is the former, and D&D is the latter.

The first edition is the pinnacle of the genre, untainted by corporate influences, and the best "generic fantasy" game, blending various forms of fiction to create its own unique world. You can't say this game, or any future derivatives, has a genre except "generic fantasy."

We were aware of this as early as the 1970s.

I also hear the criticisms of Shadowdark. It is still one of my S-tier games, offering the best implementation of 5E, but it is often described as "generic dark fantasy" due to its fantasy genre. However, even within the "D&D"-style generic fantasy genre, it is deadlier and features a theme of evil, evoking a sense of magical darkness akin to a horror movie. Is it any particular genre? This still falls within the "generic fantasy" genre, combined with "evil darkness," which is acceptable.

The game is establishing its own unique setting, which is helping to solidify its legacy as "something else" and making it more than just a generic fantasy ruleset. I hope the new setting guide gives this game a "what" and "where" that many crave. December and the Western Reaches book delivery is a long time off, but I look forward to that Christmas present and this game getting its own identity.

Many get jealous of it, but it is false; they didn't think of making this game first. Technically, the 5B game was one of the first, and there have been rules-light 5E implementations at every gaming convention since 5E was made. However, the audience for Shadowdark doesn't come from the OSR; it comes from the 95% of the market that plays 5E, which is why the game is so huge.

Shadowdark is an OSR gateway game. It is also a direct replacement for D&D for many, which is good. Overall, rules-light 5E benefits the hobby and the OSR.

But no D&D game will ever do a specific version of fantasy well. It will always be a staple of the D&D genre. If I want a fantasy game based on a book or specific setting, I will grab my copy of Basic Roleplaying or GURPS and start designing a real game from scratch. You can't do particular fantasy with D&D anyway, since the game's "books full of stuff" tend to intrude on the conversation, and you will have mages in Game of Thrones casting "Tenser's Floating Disk" and "Magic Missile." Beholders will be floating around. As cool as it sounds, it will ultimately prove to be unimpressive.

D&D makes every genre its own, and generic fantasy is no exception.

It is like saying that Marvel movies are in the MCU genre but aren't superhero movies. Anything in the MCU genre is part of the MCU, not any other superhero genre.

D&D brings its standard set of "fantasy assumptions and the kitchen sink" to the table, and it takes over your genre. Sure, you can ask "what is the genre" all day, but the only answer you will get is "kitchen sink fantasy."

I love kitchen-sink fantasy as a genre, but I am always wary of it because it takes over your game, shoves your ideas out the window for the sake of the kitchen sink, and brings everything else in through the door.

However, if you attempt to categorize generic fantasy games into a single genre, you will be chasing your tail in circles forever. They aren't any genre but themselves.

Rolemaster FRP

The Rolemaster FRP books have always been the nicest in the series, and this game edition is the most complex. That said, this version of the game feels the best supported, the art is fantastic, the books are laid out very professionally, and the library is the largest and most complete of any of the versions.

When I had trouble understanding a concept in Rolemaster Classic, I came here and understood it better. These books feel the easiest to learn from and read, except the Arms Law book, which was fixed in the 2003 version (above), which reprinted and streamlined the tables in an easier-to-read format.

The argument is that if you are going Rolemaster, go for the best edition. I grew up with the 1990s version, which was my first introduction to the system. Many still prefer the Classic (2nd Edition), and you can get those books as softcover print-on-demand books.

The new books are excellent and filled with bug fixes and optimizations, and this version is well-supported on VTTs. However, the library is currently incomplete. I support them and keep up with the PDFs and hardcovers, but my heart is in the 1990s with the system I first knew as Rolemaster. The company supports both systems, but Unified is the path forward for the future game. At this point, it is a matter of preference and personal comfort.

Unified is also the more straightforward game, better laid out, streamlined, and organized. The art is okay, and the collection of races is strange. 90% of people will define their own custom races and worlds, so the ones they give are good examples, but most will just DIY their own race choices.

Unified is also well-play tested, with many edge-case rules thrown out. The system felt like it had been redesigned to incorporate the best of the Classic and Standard systems, with bloat and endless details cut out of the game for the best parts.

I wish the RM FRP had PoD hardcovers. The RM RFP Creatures & Monsters is the game's current "best monster book." I hope they release the two planned monster book volumes this year. I need my monster books!

HARP is also a strong game. Sometimes, I read through Rolemaster, and I give up and go right back to HARP. Even the new edition of Rolemaster has its strangely written parts and outright contradictions in the text that throw up a stop sign in the middle of an expressway, and I am left scratching my head and wishing it was all a little easier to play. HARP is that game, and it can have the same (or better) crit charts in one of the expansion books.

Parts of Rolemaster United are still horribly overwritten and obtuse. In many cases, they lack clarity in the summary and examples that clarify what is going on. The game was written by people who understand it, and just breaking into it means understanding not only what is going on now but also how it used to be done in past versions.

An example on page 32 of the new Spell Law is where two identical level 30 magicians get a new level 23 fire spell on the Fire Law spell list. When they each have an existing level 23 fire spell and are "doubling up" on spells at that level, one pays 1 DP and the other 2 DP. It isn't explained why one pays 2 DP versus 1, and the example explains what developing the 31st and 32nd ranks of Fire law would cost, which has nothing to do with what is presented in the example.

The red books RMSS/FRP simplified how many spells you learned per level, removed the "spell gain roll" mechanic of classic, and made "knowing spells at a purchased level" automatic. Universal goes back to the earlier mechanic, but only for "extra spells doubled up at a level," which is confusing since this seems to be for "player developed" spells only, and the spell lists don't double up on spells at a level.

So, we get a broken example that covers an edge case. It seems a lot more critical than it is and confuses the entire mechanic of answering the question, "How many DP does it cost to learn spells at a given level of a skill?"

The answer is zero, "The first spell on the level is free if the level is already paid for."

To be fair, United aligns with RMSS/FRP and makes sense. However, the research rules in United confuse things, especially since they are only for player-developed spells.

The game is transitory, and they needed to release the core books and books "usable with other systems" first, such as the Treasure book. We still use the older monster book. The new game is worth checking out and supporting. I have a soft spot for the red-book classics, but the future looks bright for this game, and I hope more people rediscover a true classic.