Nimble 5e: Is it a "Real" Game?

The core rulebook is impossibly thin. I pick it up, and the first thought that comes into my head is, "Is this a game?" It feels more like a mod for a full version of 5E than a full game, like the book is meant to use "with" an established game as a rules hack.

But it isn't.

This is actually a full game. The core rulebook is 58 pages, and very concise. Granted, you pull in a lot of the "how to play" stuff from other games, and a lot of that fluff isn't needed here. In fact, I prefer a game that keeps the "how to play" section light and doesn't tell you too much; many games go overboard in this area and end up helping you plan what snacks to bring. Also, there are so many "self-help" books on D&D on Amazon, and so many YouTube videos on the subject that there is no lack of information on how to play a role-playing game. There may be too much information, and most of it is bad.

In fact, the lack of "how to play" information in the original role-playing games helped develop many of the "OSR tropes" we use today, since many of them were never written down back then. There is an argument to make that "how you play is the right way" and to stop micro-managing gamers who are smart enough to figure this out for themselves. Who knows, maybe the "new tropes" could have been built without all this "how to play" advice, and we are missing out on something?

But at first glance, Nimble 5e feels too small to be a real game, yet it is. The "core rules" of Old School Essentials (minus the classes and spells) are about 60-70 pages long, so it is of a similar length; just the rules needed for in-game play are not all that long in most games. OSE also has a lot of "old school procedures" built in, so it is about 10 pages longer due to the OSR standards for travel, exploration, hiring, and so on. The character's book in Nimble 5e is the primary source of information, and the two books are wisely split so as not to force people to fight over books when referencing class abilities versus game rules.

5E can't be this compact, can it? Shadowdark proves it can be, and the core rules of that game are only about 10-12 pages, last I checked. 5E does not have to be the game that takes up a shelf. It can be small, tight, focused, and just as expressive as a set of rules the size of a set of encyclopedias. All it takes is a better design team and a company that does not pay by the word.

Design matters. Concise rules are a highly desirable feature. We can demand better.

One of the issues with the core set is a two-subclass limit to the core classes, but that should improve with the expansion and the subclass additions in the zines. The monsters are being massively expanded, too, and that is a welcome change. All the standard fantasy tropes are here, plus a bunch of expansion roles, races, and modern fantasy standards. This is more of a modern fantasy game where "anything goes," but that is the current state of fantasy: random shapes gather with random roles, and everyone figures out a way. Classic fantasy has more established roles: tanks, healers, damage, rogues, and so on.

Tales of the Valiant is still an excellent "companion game" for Nimble 5e. Anything Nimble needs, monsters, magic items, spells for rare scrolls, potions, gear, and other random bits, ToV can fill in. Adventures can be pulled from any 5E source, but Kobold Press also publishes excellent adventures that directly port into Nimble, and that modern adventuring feel is present here.

Nimble needing other games is what made me think Nimble isn't a full game, but as time goes on, Nimble gets better and better, and these things get filled in and Nimble-ized. Magic items, potions, runes, and unique spell scrolls, I would love to see come next. Having 200+ monsters fills in a huge gap in the game.

ToV is excellent on its own, but it is still "full 5E." Nimble is something else entirely, not rules-light, but rules-fast. I like systems that get out of the way of my imagination and character sheets that are not 12 pages long. Nimble can do everything ToV does, but with an open 3-action system that encourages fast and imaginative play. If I want to play "adventure heroes," I will reach for Nimble before I do a full 5E implementation, just because 5E is too much game in most cases, designed with a clumsy mix of modern storytelling and old-school sensibilities that don't always work great together.

Nimble? The closest we are getting to OSE in 5E outside of Shadowdark, without the grimdark.

If you want the gritty old-school feeling, play Shadowdark.

If you want that freewheeling, anything goes feeling, play Nimble.

With these two games, there is very little reason to pick up a slow-playing, big-book version of 5E ever again. Why am I wasting time and money on online character creation tools and printing out character sheets dozens of pages long? If I can get the same experience from a single-page character sheet, that is what I have always wanted from a 5E game, so I will play that.

Nimble started as a 5E mod, but it slowly became its own thing and remains side-grade-compatible with everything in 5E, which is a very smart move. Nimble feels like the BX version of 5E, moddable, easier to play, faster, and far less complicated than the original game, but that simplicity is freedom and expressiveness to try new things, focus on stories, and break away from the chains of rules and limited, pedantic action types limiting your ideas and playstyle.

5E's action economy sucks, and telling players, "you can't do that cool thing because of this rule," kills the game for many. D&D 5E's action types mutated into a horrible, terrible, slow, and confusing game, and it never should have been that way. They redid the game in 2024 with 5.5E and never fixed the worst part of the game. The broken D&D action economy is the first thing Pathfinder 2E fixed, and there is a reason for that.

In Nimble 5e? Three actions. Have fun. This is the way it should be.

The fact that Nimble is math-compatible with 5E and that monsters can be ported directly is a huge help. This means we get all the 5E adventures directly usable with the new rules. Nimble looks at piles of 5E rulebooks, shrugs its shoulders, and smiles, saying, "Come play this with me and stop slogging through endless rules and incompatible action types."

Why am I spending my time in an online-only character sheet program and being forced to buy digital books to access character features? Why am I buying books twice to play the game? Why am I being forced to play on VTTs? Why do I have to care about the difference between standard actions and bonus actions, and what can and can't be done with either?

Again, everything I dislike about 5E is fixed in Nimble. I can just play. I am not bogged down in rules or character sheets. Part of why I like Numble 5e so much is the parts I dislike about full 5E. I have to stop myself; every time I talk about why I like Nimble, I begin talking about how I dislike 5E.

It is a vicious cycle. If all you see Nimble as is "how much you hate 5E," then yes, Nimble is not a "real" game to you. The only thing that defines it in your eyes is your dislike of another game. Nimble is its own thing, worthy of standing on its own without 5E hanging over its shoulder constantly.

Nimble is what 2024 D&D should have been. This is the superheroic fantasy version of 5E, like Shadowdark is the old-school version.

Stepping back and looking at Nimble, how I look at Shadowdark, then, yes, Nimble 5e is a "real" game for me.

And a really good one.

Monsters & More! A Nimble TTRPG Reprint & Expansion

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/nimblerpg/monsters-and-more-a-nimble-ttrpg-reprint-and-expansion

The Nimble 5e game is an interesting box set, and they currently have a Kickstarter going for a sorely needed monster expansion book, and the game now feels complete. The original game felt woefully short of monsters, and while all the existing 5E monsters (and magic items) are directly convertible, the game desperately needed its own bestiary. There are also expansion classes in this Kickstarter, so the game is growing.

Everything I dislike about 5E I like about Nimble. They fix the number one problem that 5E has, the size of the game and books. The only issue is that, like most 5E books, this is an expensive game and a premium product. The price of everything has gone up, and unlike OSR games fighting to keep the value proposition, this is not an inexpensive hobby. Thankfully, you only need the core books, and the per-player cost is lower than the gamemaster buy-in.

A few digest-sized hardcovers are all you need to play 5E. Nimble 5e captures the magical Old School Essentials compact design style perfectly, and it proves you do not need fifty pounds of books to play and enjoy 5E. Nimble 5e perfectly serves as an OSE 5E, capturing that heroic playstyle in a small-book format without needing to go hardcore Shadowdark. While Shadowdark is a great game, Nimble replaces the need to have a massive, multi-shelf library to support heroic 5E play.

Nimble 5e does everything 5E does, but with far less tripe, overwriting, and worthless fluff. Please don't force me to break my back carrying hundreds of pages of coffee-table art to a game, or listen to the game designers spend a dozen full-sized pages explaining what a paladin does. Obviously, a lot of 5E books are paid-by-the-word, and it is our shelves and backpacks that suffer. In the era of endlessly-generated AI fluff and pure generative agentic e-waste, Nimble 5e is refreshing.

They state Nimble 5e has no AI content. All of this is real. Another huge thank you!

Also, there do not appear to be any passive checks in this game, and it leans more into the "say what you do" old-school sensibility, limiting checks to what matters. Finally. Passive skills are horrible, putting the GM in VCR mode, and it removes interactivity and verbal exploration. If something is a "passive check," then just say it. Why are the rules forcing you to hide information, and putting whether you say it or not behind rules tied to character builds? If there is a pit trap, telegraph it. There are two rules in Nimble that put a wooden stake in the heart of the "hidden information" game:

"When information is necessary: Choose one hero who "knows" the information. For instance: the Hunter knows about this forest, the Mage knows what an arcane symbol means. Alternatively, have everyone roll a skill check and reward the hero with the highest roll with the information. They are the ones who knew it!" - Nimble, GM Guide, Page 5.

So if you have a rogue character or a machinist, they will have the trap knowledge. Have one with the party? Make them automatically spot the suspicious floor ahead, and give them the best information.  If you don't, you still see something is off, but you don't have the best information on what it may be. And:

"Telegraph Danger. You MUST be clear about danger: you are their eyes and ears. They cannot make meaningful decisions if they are in the dark about how deadly a situation is. If you telegraphed danger and the heroes still make bad decisions, let them suffer the consequences of their choices." - Nimble, GM Guide, Page 5.

And they say make traps obvious, and not to gate critical information behind skill checks. This even applies to lore, persuasion, and other checks. Do not gate story progression behind the skill system, or hide information that is needed to move forward.

This is an area where modern games "get it," and D&D tries to walk the line between OSR play and modern adventure gaming, and pleases no one. While I love my OSR-style "10-foot-pole play" and "verbally poke and twist everything" sort of verbal, descriptive puzzle-solving, there exists an equally viable "narrative action RPG" style of play that does away with those tropes and focuses on combat and roleplaying. You can have both, but D&D tries to codify the old-school play style in endless rules and fails terribly in a passive quagmire.

Also, no whiffs or to-hit rolls. Just roll damage. If you roll a one, you miss. If you roll max, damage explodes. This is good stuff, and it speeds play. What is the difference between a low damage roll and a miss anyway? In 5E, versus a monster with 30 hit points, rolling a one on damage might as well be a miss. Only make me make rolls that matter, thank you.

Where is the game still lacking? Honestly, utility spells and magic items. The former is solved easily by a bit of GM fiat, letting similar or attack spells have utility uses, or just allowing a skill check to produce a utility magical effect. The latter is solved easily by using magic items from any 5E game. Similarly, popular utility spells from 5E can be ported in using scrolls, either finding or creation (passwall, teleport, etc.). These are not huge problems and are easily solved.

Personally, I like being able to control game-changing and story-breaking utility spells like passwall,  ESP, telepathy, teleport, gate, scrying, banishment, and resurrection through spell scrolls. You find a scroll of teleportation, use it wisely since this may be the only one you find. They are still "in the game," but not so accessible that they are breaking every story the players come across.

There is a lot to like about Nimble, and as a lightweight (but not rules-light) system that can play all my 5E adventures without breaking my shelf, hurting my back, or wasting my time.

The Kickstarter for the monster expansion is worthy. This is the last week, and this is a worthy game and buy-in.

Highly recommended.

D&D 5.5E

Well, that seals it, D&D 2024/5.5E is a complete failure.

Wizards made an internal policy change: on D&D Beyond, they call it 5.5E, but outside the company (and in every book printed), it is still D&D 2024. I haven't heard of anything else changing, such as requiring books on DM's Guild to use "the latest version of the rules," and they are not reprinting or supporting D&D 5E books, so at this point, who cares? If they are still not officially supporting 2014 5E, what does any of this matter?

The 2024 name was terrible, since it is two years old now and will be three next year. This is as bad as songs that mention the current year, with lines like "It's 1990!"

Sigh.

An already terrible and confusing strategy gets worse, with the game being called one thing on your website and another thing everywhere else. Your partners have two sets of rules to work under. If we are publishing here, we can call it this, but elsewhere it has to be that.

I've seen less confused customers walk away from things that even slightly gave them pause. I've seen people not buy a car because of the sound the gas tank cover makes when closing, or how operating the controls feels. These little things matter so much, yet nobody gets it, or feels "they will ignore that."

They don't ignore that.

In fact, the tiniest things are often the biggest giveaways.

Why is this company even writing new editions of the rules? What they have are the best games ever written. AD&D should be treated like the original Monopoly rules, or a novel such as The Lord of the Rings; it is timeless and does not need updating or changing by sensitivity readers. Leave it be, and let people play. Support classic 5E, and allow people to publish for that. Get out of creating new editions of the game to support; it only gets worse from here with 6E, 7E, 8E, and 9E, and all the 0.5 variants of those rules, too.

We also have better, less confusing, better supported versions of the game out there, like Tales of the Valiant and Level Up A5E. Many have moved on to Pathfinder 2, Draw Steel, or Daggerheart. The OSR is huge. Even Dungeon Crawl Classics has a massive number-three spot in gaming (by GenCon game numbers). While 5E was a huge hit, the edition's end showed confusion, creative weakness, and a floundering strategy behind the brand.

But, by all means, keep playing 5E or 5.5E if that is what you like. "The game is dead" is just a temporary thing here in D&D land, and it has happened many times before. The only way D&D can truly die is if they keep printing new editions, and people grow tired of the entire confusing hydra of different versions of the game, all incompatible with each other. Here is another edition of the game; another head grows, and the fandom is again split into a group who like this one versus the dozen previous editions of the game and all their subflavors.

Like a multiverse, a multiedition game will die under the weight of customer confusion.

And you are inviting an Apple-like company to step in with an "it just works" strategy and steal all your customers. Someone will step in and "out D&D" you.

These tabletop game companies that think they are mobile game companies or OS vendors will always fail. D&D isn't a Windows operating system that keeps getting worse every year as features are removed and AI is shoved into everything from Notepad to Calculator, it gets arcane version and patch numbers, and all of a sudden, your favorite apps (or adventures) no longer run. Different computers only run different versions of Windows. You aren't sure when you buy a program if it will work, or how long it will work. You are constantly forced to deal with incompatibilities and workarounds.

Or wait, maybe D&D is just like Windows, and that is its problem.

Off the Shelf: HARP

If you like Rolemaster, but you do not want the complexity, there is always HARP. With the HARP implementation of Martial Law, you get a good 75-85% of the Rolemaster experience with the crit tables, and you can always make up results similar to have more variety. But the rules are far easier to understand and manage than those of Rolemaster, especially for character creation.

What does playing Rolemaster gain you? You get the full crit tables, all the spells in Spell Law, and the original game experience. The characters are more flexible, and the system is far more robust and classic. Most players, I would say 90%, do not have the time to put into Rolemaster and enjoy the complexity and depth. Most players, especially those coming from OSR games and B/X, will enjoy HARP far more than Rolemaster. If you picked up Rolemaster, bounced off character creation hard, and gave up, give HARP a try. If you do not have the time for Rolemaster, honestly, play HARP.

Rolemaster does the best job of simulating the effects of specific weapons versus specific armors, whereas in HARP, this is all abstracted. If you crave that "weapon X versus armor Y" style of combat,  and having the effect or crits change depending on that interaction, play Rolemaster. There are optional rules that add this depth in HARP Martial Law, but they slow down combat somewhat and force adjustments to the numbers depending on target armor.

If all you want is to grab a sword and wander the hills to battle orcs and collect their loot, where story means more than simulation, play HARP. You will see the benefits of a more engaging simulation game than a B/X, and have the best parts of Rolemaster without the complexity. HARP is a good middle ground between B/X and Rolemaster, and perfectly captures that Tolkien-style adventure and storytelling, far better than 5E, which has lost its way and become a planar superhero game.

If you want the OG, mace versus chainmail, hard realism game of simulation combat, play Rolemaster United. If you don't want the complexity and just want a close-enough experience, play HARP. Both have a place, given your interest levels and time.

And HARP is a complete game, ten books (plus an adventure), and you have a nice-sized library. The secret to enjoying HARP is just starting with the core book, which has everything: monsters, treasure, magic, and more, and ignoring the rest of the library. The crit charts in the core HARP book may get repetitive, so pull in the expanded tables from Martial Law if you want a little more variety and complexity; otherwise, they are not needed, and you can just make up similar results.

The criticism of the original HARP book's crit tables stems from the fact that it lists 19 results per attack type. It sounds like a lot, but in large combats, the same critical results can happen twice. For example, a result of 51-60 on a crush attack gives us, "You broke his collarbone. Foe takes 15 Hits, is stunned 1 round, and is at -10." Keep rolling that versus orcs, and you have a lot of broken orc collarbones, and you start to break immersion. But we can avoid breaking immersion by simply choosing to break other things.

HARP, Hit Location optional rule, page 99.

Now, if we use the optional hit location rules, you have 10 locations to factor in on top of that. We could simply change that "collarbone" to "whatever we hit and break that." It does not matter too much; just reinterpret the result and perhaps force a roll to keep hold of a weapon or shield if a hand or arm is hit, or to avoid falling down on leg or foot strikes. Now, we have possibly 190 results per attack type, and the problem is far less than we imagined.

You could even add a d10 qualifier to the word "broke" to allow for a variety of interpretations, such as grazed, bruised, crushed, broken, broken open, or completely smashed. How bad is it really? Roll a d10; let 1 be the most forgiving, with 10 the least. Now modify the result by ±50 %, and you have 1,900 results per attack type, and you are starting to eclipse Rolemaster (and you are inserting your imagination into the tables). Perhaps the bruise is 8 extra hits, no stun, and a -5. Perhaps the smashed result is 23 extra hits, 2 stun turns, and a -15.

With 1,900 results per attack type, I would say that is an insane amount of damage results. Mind you, I am only talking about using the base book. I do not need Martial Law to do this. I am not adding in any of the expansion books, and the combats are already this good.

Perhaps the result of a 1 is that the blow is deflected and no damage occurs at all, or it hits an enemy next to the player, sending that insta-killing head blow meant for you into the nearest orc. Perhaps that 10 result is not even damage at all, but the blow sends the magic shield the fighter is holding flying off a cliff and is lost forever. Maybe the attack sails into the party's light source and smashes the lantern, spilling flammable oil all over the holder (or a nearby ally). "The worst possible thing" on a result of 10 can be interpreted in many ways, just as the "best result of 1" can be as well.

That d10 qualifier roll is a tool to introduce environmental, situational, material, physiological, story-based, or even psychological factors into the damage equation.

Just by adding a few drops of our imagination, and only using the basic game's "supposedly limiting" tables, we are beating Rolemaster in both variety and outcomes in combat crits, adding in environmental and situational dependent elements, while keeping HARP's simplicity. HARP was designed to be flexible like this, and it did not take me much tweaking to craft critical results that excite me to play this game.

Let Rolemaster be the wargame-like, X versus Y, medieval simulation game.

Let HARP flow with the story, and leave much of the interpretive work to you.

ERA for Rolemaster

The ERA character creation system for Rolemaster works. It is a strange system, a batch file that pops up a webpage where you can create your characters, but I give them credit for making this cross-compatible and even including a Linux launcher. I tested the Linux version, and it works.

With Windows dying on the vine, seeing more indie devs embrace Linux and character-creation tools that run natively on it is encouraging. Not a day goes by that Windows isn't trying to steal and hide my files from me, and it sucks. I hate this new world, and I can see Microsoft banning local file storage one day.

There will be a day when I walk away from Windows, and that day is coming.

You can't "go back" once your character sheet is finalized, and you get a template sheet that you can "level up" and allocate skill levels. This is how Rolemaster works: you do a lot of work in character generation, "setting up a sheet" where the costs of different choices will be predetermined, and when you level, you will be spending CP to fill out those choices as you gain them.

Unlike GURPS, where the cost for skills in different categories is the same for everyone, in Rolemaster, your class and culture determine the costs you pay for different skills. You can go outside your build, but it will just cost you more points, so your fighter can learn magic. In that sense, Rolemaster is very similar to GURPS, but character creation sets up the cost for every skill in the game based on choices made. GURPS assumes every character is a blank sheet of paper, and a medieval fighter can go on to be an astrophysicist - you just have to spend the points. 

In Rolemaster, the cost for those science skills will be prohibitively high, and that fighter will struggle since that is not "who they started as in life," but they can do it, just not as easily as someone trained from a young age to do that task. The "class system" in Rolemaster defines what is easier for you in terms of future progress, but it does not completely control it.

GURPS is more in line with modern educational thinking, where anyone can retrain for anything at any age, whereas Rolemaster emphasizes the importance of early childhood education. In my opinion, your early schooling will determine much of your life, and it only gets harder the later you go in life when you try to retrain and do something new. Rolemaster understands the basic human condition and uses class and background to model a character's "early years" quite effectively.

This is why we can't shortchange education, nor allow it to be used as a trust fund for the greedy among us to raid and live off of. If you are not creating doctors and engineers at an early age, decades down the line, everyone will suffer, including those who stole from the system for short-term gains. You steal from education today, and there goes that doctor you will need 20 years from now.

Philosophically, I am more in line with Rolemaster's view of education, the traditional method of younger minds learn easier, and setting up those neurological pathways where a young mind can be trained to think in ways that make their career and later progress in their life in the areas their minds have been well-experienced in.

Rolemaster models early education as the character's "class choices," and those are the areas you are deciding: "I want to be great at these things later." The "Role" in Rolemaster is not for role-playing; it is more for the characters' "Role" in the world and life. The "Role" you set yourself up in for the story, and the "Role" you will take in a life on the stage built by your choices.

The ERA software does a good job building your character sheet and then letting you level up your character. You can create printable sheets with this software, and that helps a lot. Rolemaster is a d100 game with many skills, but it's simple to play; creating characters is a major hurdle.

The ERA software also serves as a "training tool" for character design, walking you through the steps and explaining what happens next. It helped me get a handle on the character creation method much more easily than reading the books.

Click on a spell list, and it tells you the known spells in that list. The HTML files it creates are nice for a basic reference sheet, but the "view character sheet" function feels more complete and useful during play. I like the spell lists in the character sheet view for my casters. Like GURPS Dungeon Fantasy, Rolemaster's spell lists start off in the "magical tricks" realm, and they gradually move into the more fearsome magics. GURPS does this through prerequisites, while Rolemaster does leveled spell lists.

They have modules for RMU, RM Classic, RM FRP, and Spacemaster Privateers. Some of the games are better supported with the books than others, and each book is a separate purchase.

This is a must-have for Rolemaster players, and it walks you through character creation slowly and lets you understand each step along the way. There is even a helpful system that explains what is happening on each screen. A strong recommend for Rolemaster players, and it gives you that confidence in character creation to start imagining characters in the game, and in your worlds.

Off the Shelf: Adventures Dark & Deep

While Castles & Crusades is the fantasy game for me, nothing can touch the king, which would be the heavily modified and improved 1E clone, Adventures Dark & Deep. This is the premium edition of 1E, starting off as a "what if" game: "What if Gary Gygax had never been forced out of TSR, and 2nd Edition was a logical continuation of AD&D 1E?" Joseph Bloch did his best to answer that question, and a revised edition later emerged, becoming its own game while retaining those strong theoretical roots. Nevermind Castles & Crusades was the last game Gary Gygax was associated with, so the two games share that bond.

And nothing touches this game.

Do you want to play the best version of 1E, with all the fiddly 1E bits, like weapon speed and attack tables? This is your game. I like descending AC and the tables! There is a cryptic, runic, old-school feeling about writing your attack matrix down and cross-referencing it during play. This was the way we did it; this is the way you should be doing it. I don't care about "the same math" or "streamlining," and sometimes those take away from the experience.

What is your chance to hit AC 6?

14.

Ooooh!

There is a magic and feeling of mystery here that, once you know the math behind it, something is lost. If your "attack modifier" is +3, and the referee gives you a further +1, it is now +4, so what? If the AC is 18, you still need to roll a 14 or higher, but the magic feels somehow diminished.

With that 14, if the referee ever gives you a positive modifier for an attack, it feels more special. Even if the math is the same, a bulk "plus to attack" feels less special than "looking it up on a table" and "getting a further bonus." Why are we ruining the magic of the dice by factoring everything down to the lowest common denominator?

It sounds silly and stupid, but there is something to this. Back when we were kids, we didn't factor this in. We trusted the "kind wizard Gygax" and his "magic dice rocks." We trusted the methods by which his game could unlock worlds of adventure. Get the math majors and mobile game producers out of the hobby, and get the superstition and mysticism back into it.

And the monster book is amazing, the best-of-the-best 1E foes and creatures, all laid out in exacting detail and glory. Since this is a 1E game, you have complete OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry, and many other bestiaries to choose from. There are almost too many monsters to count in 1E books, and that is a wonderful thing. You get the best monsters here, and many you will recognize immediately from any edition of the game.

If I am supporting one edition of the game going forward, with the best books you can buy, this is the version to get. Sure, C&C and OSE are easier and more streamlined, but if I am playing 1E, I want all the fiddly bits and strange table references. I want weapon speed to matter. I want the RoF and all the modifiers in the weapon charts. I want the ability score modifiers, the level limits, and all the strange race-and-class combinations allowed.

Is it fair to allow a drow to be a paladin? Yes. Is it allowed? No, there isn't that hierarchy or tradition in the drow culture. Could they? Sure, as a special case, but that should be left for the referee to decide and the player to ask for.

Why are game designers making the "special case" the "every case"? Again, here we go with streamlining, optimization, changes to fairness, and the blandification of the game's "inbuilt" culture and assumptions: "everyone can be everything and all math is optimized." You are taking what should be the game's strangeness and mystery and allowing "all to be all," and now nothing really matters. Gnome barbarians? Orc bards? Dwarf wizards? Lawful good assassins? Any race and class combo to any level? Sure, why not? The absurd becomes the everyday.

The designers just took away all my "special player requests" and "allowed everything."

Gee, thanks.

I used to be able to do favors for players with really great ideas, but the designers took all that away to please imaginary people. In short, this is the number one problem in gaming right now. Trying to please everyone, yet pleasing nobody.

We also have a quick-start set of rules that covers about 70% of the game. Lite is an amazing value and worth having as a one-book reference guide to all the best options and lower-level powers, spells, and monsters in the game. You can start a campaign with this and run it through until the end, and never know you were playing with the lite rules until a few special cases come up, if they ever do.

The Lite rules are a near-complete game focusing on the lower levels (and the iconic choices), most of which many groups will never venture past. The only major missing piece is the optional skill system, which is easily ported in from the main book and not really needed for most play.

And the books go on and on with this game, not needing many, but each one is a winner. We have a Cthulhu mythos book, an expansion (Book of Fell Wisdom) on the way, an answer to Oriental Adventures, and a few more that are all amazing. These are all fully compatible with OSRIC and AD&D 1E (and 2E), so you get the best game ever created, with more.

If I want a rules-light AD&D-style game with modern improvements, I will play Castles & Crusades. If I want the best version of 1E ever imagined, Adventures Dark and Deep is a behemoth. For realistic fantasy gaming, Rolemaster is still my go-to game, but if the 1E "stuff" is what I want, then ADAD is the game to play.

If you are a mega-fan of 1E, this is the mega-game for 1E.

Off the Shelf: Rolemaster Unified

Rolemaster is a classic, possibly one of the greatest pen-and-paper games of all time. The original game was a "reaction game" to AD&D, written as the "X Law" rules expansions or as a complete game alternative to AD&D systems, so it existed alongside the game but also as a better system in parallel.

The unified system is a streamlined version of the game, possibly the best ever written, and it only has a few flaws - the art and a few strange monster stats. Neither flaw is a game-breaker, and that's why we are here: the art in our minds, not the books. Monster stats can be quickly adjusted by 10 points here and there, as needed. No monster should be the same as the other, and as long as you are in the ballpark, who cares? We will be getting "monster design" rules in Creature Law II, so the tools to create new beasts are coming, and the only downside for playing this game is the slower release schedule.

That said, we do have a complete game with the four books we have: Core, Creature I, Treasure, and Spell Law. Creature II and a pair of other character-focused books are in the works. We have enough for a full. stand-alone adventure game with the books we have.

So, why pull Rolemaster out of storage?

First up, just the four books are coming out of storage, and none of the previous versions. If I am looking for a "forever game" to support, I will leave the past behind and focus on what we have and the company's efforts going forward. The best way we can ensure Rolemater is played for a long time is to support the new stuff, and the new stuff is pretty good. It is solid, works well, is cleanly presented, and streamlines much of the game.

Post-house-disaster, I am focusing on the "best of the best" of my library that I will keep. I know the games I want, GURPS being the biggest, but there are a few other key games I am rebuilding around. Why is Rolemaster in this group?

So many played Middle-Earth Role-Playing in the 1990s with a variant of this system that it became imbued with Tolkien's legacy. The builds, skills, success system, crit charts, spells, and so much more became part of the legacy of "true fantasy," and the system feels like home. If you want to play serious, literate, meaningful, deadly, story-based tales of adventure and heroism, then this system should be your go-to game.

If you played MERP in the 1990s, gave up on AD&D 2nd Edition, and threw your dice in with the legacy of the Lord of the Rings, then Rolemaster feels like home. HARP is the "best close" version of MERP these days, and still a worthy game, but nothing sings like "full Rolemaster" for having it all. HARP is more Rolemaster Lite, and Rolemaster is the deeper, more hardcore, grittier game. HARP is still a worthy choice if you do not want all the depth and just want a more pulp-adventure game with a lighter level of detail.

Rolemaster is the full experience. Narratively, this game rules.

Every attack coming at your character could be their last, and also could possibly stay with them the rest of their life with a crippling injury. This is the deepest "story consequences" in roleplaying, where a sword to the gut leaves your character injured for a long time, and scarred for life. This is not the trippy fantasy land of D&D 5E, where you can sleep off a shotgun blast to the face and be fine the next day. Every blow that lands in Rolemaster is serious business.

And every blow you land has the potential to turn into pure awesome.

The d100 rolls explode, coming in or going out, so even a minor attack from a lowly goblin can end your character's story. Think before you jump into battle, and pick your fights carefully.

GURPS comes close, but it does not equal this in terms of narrative, detailed, engaging combat. GURPS is more "hex tactical meets character builder" and a few steps less narrative-focused than Rolemaster. GURPS does have the better "in character" disadvantage system with self-control rolls, but if you want detailed battles where weapons work and hit differently, Rolemaster is your game.

Every weapon blow and spell attack in Rolemaster tells a part of the story. Other games do not give me this. Rules-light games fall flat. 5E just fails to deliver engaging combat. The legacy of video games and cozy influences in modern games means character protection is a non-negotiable part of the design, and players are near-guaranteed "death never happens," and "terrible things that could trigger me" are not even considered.

My cute fox-person will never get shot in the spleen by an arrow and bleed out, then have an Orc crush their skull as they lie there incapacitated and dying. This brutal Dark Souls-like permadeath experience never happens in these new games.

Games these days have gotten too safe. They are far too cozy and soft. They are too afraid of causing mental health issues in their audience. If you are too tied to your cute, idealistic, self-insert anthropomorphic animal hero, do not play Rolemaster. Walk away. D&D 5E will be a happier place for you. Do not expose yourself to this game. You will end up upset, hurt, and angry.

Some people can't handle Rolemaster.

If you want more, play Rolemaster. Some crave this deadly, detailed, gritty, and impactful experience. They want their dice rolls to matter, and for each roll to have insane potential or tragic heartbreak. They want their sword to slice through flesh and slay in clinical, realistic, gory detail. They accept fate, in that their perfect character could fall to a thief's dagger in an alley, a poisoned blowgun from an assassin, or a lucky blow of a goblin's rusty axe. That perfect character's story could end in tragedy at any moment, and the ideal ending, or even the one that makes the most sense, could stop at any time in the most unsatisfying way.

But you will feel alive at every moment along the way.

And in the end, if you make it there, it will be far, far, far more satisfying than anything a modern game could ever imagine delivering.