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.

Rolemaster FRP: Skill Categories vs. Skills

One aspect of Rolemaster that I could not understand was the difference between the games' Skill Categories and Skills.

Skill Categories are broad training in groups or related skills. These are never rolled and are more like calculating a modifier for a group of skills under it. An example is the category Weapon: 1-H Edged, your character's basic proficiency in all one-handed edged weapons, from daggers to longswords. This is not your skill with these weapons since you still need to buy ranks in the individual weapons under this Skill Category, such as broadsword or dagger.

Skills are the individual skills you use. These are what you roll. You could have a Skill Category in Weapons: Missile, but you still need to buy the individual missile weapons under it and apply the category bonus to the final skill total, such as a composite bow.

Let's tear down the example in the book because there is one chart that always confuses the heck out of me:

Rank Bonus Table T-2.2! You will see I highlighted two cells on this: the level 6 Standard Category Rank Bonus and the level 6 Standard bonus. Which one do you use for what? I am confused! I often quit the game here since I kept forgetting which column was for what.

Always use the second (shaded) column for the Category sheet!

Let's start with the shaded column, the Standard Category Rank Bonus. This is only used for the Skill Category Record Sheet, T-6.2! See the highlighted green "level 6" and the "+12" bonus? That calculates our final +43 value in the red circle and applies to ALL our Weapon: 1H Edged skills that we could buy in the future. Our "category modifier" is always calculated with the shaded column for Standard Category Rank Bonuses. Okay, we got the "red circle value" that applies to every Weapon: 1H Edged skill; what now?

Always use the third (unshaded) column for the Skill sheet!

We will look at the Skill Record Sheet, T-6.3; this is our "in-play sheet" to make skill rolls! In that red circle, the "Rank Bonus of +43 " gets slotted into (red circle). Forget about the category sheet for now! Now, if we have 6 levels of a specific weapon, such as this character's broadsword, that gets a +18 (blue box). Where does that come from? This is where I panic and give up on the game.

This number comes from column three of the Rank Bonus Table T-2.2 (the unshaded one). See the blue box of +18? This is what the six ranks of a specific skill, in this case, broadsword, will add to our final skill total.

What confuses me is the "three box notation" and I get all hung up on that. There are three other skill types with special notation, but both categories and skills share that same notation type and it crosses the wires in my head. Shaded is for skill categories, unshaded is for regular skills.

Think of Rolemaster's lowest-level skills as any other game's specialty skills, and the Category Rank Bonus applies to all the specialty skills under it.

If our character tried to use another 1H-edged weapon, such as a cutlass or hand axe, but we did not have a skill level in using the weapon, we would rate it at rank zero for a -15 modifier. However, we would still get that +43 category bonus, so some familiarity would help us make attacks with a weapon we were not trained in.

Once you understand that one column of the Rank Bonus Table T-2.2 is for Skill Categories, and the next one is for the actual skills, the table becomes very easy to understand.

All the 5E players have never made it this far in the article because they saw all the math and bailed early. We loved this stuff in the old days. What else would we use the graphing calculators that our moms bought us for school? Those pieces of electronics were our toys, and we found fun ways to use them, like in our games. Hey, I did well in math, and our games helped enormously, so they were part of our education - not just our entertainment.

What else does that +43 in 1H-edged weapons tell us about our character? They grew up and were trained to fight and kill with these types of weapons to a great degree. They will be instantly deadly with any new weapons like this they pick up. D&D doesn't tell us these things. Gronk can pick up any weapon and smash or slice. The game was too simplistic. Who was this "fighter?"

This is why we played Rolemaster.

It told us who that fighter was.

And we got to play with our graphing calculators after school.

Off the Shelf: Rolemaster Core

Okay, I refuse to use the joke "chart master" again since the game is much more than this, and I feel this label has been overused and is reductive. Yes, there are a lot of charts, but that is why we love the game.

You know all the times you struggle to come up with an interesting combat result, and an attack is, "The monster loses 12 hit points, next player, please?" Not Rolemaster, every attack is unique and has a chance to reward the player (and the table) with an interesting and possibly deadly result.

Why wouldn't I want to highlight the outcome of every attack? Isn't that why we are here? A mobile game can give you an endless stream of meaningless damage numbers. I am not here to go around a table and endlessly roll d20s, damage dice, and get nothing out of it except scratch paper with an endlessly descending column of hit point totals.

We sometimes turn to our roleplaying games and say, "Give us more."

Rolemaster was that game in the 1980s, and it still is today.

Rolemaster is also a game that turns to the players and asks more of us in return.

Oddly enough, some of my most-read articles here are my Rolemaster ones, so there are still hardcore fans of the system out there. The company is remastering the books and putting out VTT modules for Roll20. The progress is slow, and we have older books to lean on in the meantime, but the work is getting done. We even have the Rolemaster Classic system in print-on-demand like it was back in the day. And the Roll20 modules are very nice to see!

Rolemaster survives.

We have three books: Core Law, Spell Law, and Treasure Law. The art in them is full-color and passable, but it is not AI-made, which is nice. I will take okay art over AI art any day. I am waiting for the two-volume Monster Law to be released, which I hope comes this year.

Otherwise, we fall back on the compatible Rolemaster Classic monster books, which work well enough. Pick up the RMC Creatures and Treasures book, and you will be fine. Monsters are not complicated, nor do they have colossal stat blocks.

The system is percentage-based, with many modifiers (but it is not hard) and skills with levels that provide bonuses as they rank up. Ability scores are split between the current value and the maximum potential, but the game is generous with tweaking, so you won't feel like you can't be your favorite profession if your rolls aren't perfect. I like this system since it gives you the current statistic value, and the character's maximum is what they work towards.

Race determines development points, culture gives free skills, and professions determine the costs of different skills. Once you understand the profession skill tables, the rest of the system will be straightforward and easy to use. With less math, this is easier than GURPS, and the tables are fun to use.

Rolemaster does things its own way, which is interesting. Gnolls are the more traditional folklore-style kin, and they are a character option. I like that they did not take the easy route and made these the D&D "hyena-men," who are getting a little tired and on their way to becoming another animal-cracker "misunderstood PC race" in modern gaming. The trend to gentrify classic folklore along Twitter values and turn everything into cosplay is a toxic development in contemporary gaming. It is the bland, nihilistic  "sameification" of everything, and suddenly, nothing is different, and nothing matters.

There are plenty of small folk in RM; this is a very Tolkien-inspired world and experience, but with a few additions and improvements. This is one of the best games for campaigns that are primarily small folk since there are so many cultures and types to choose from, and they are all unique and interesting.

The line art is from Rolemaster Classic (Monsters & Treasures book), which I love. The above are the trolls, of which the game has many types. They are classic beasts that chase small folk around as the big bad guy of an adventure. The monsters have this Old English vibe, and they aren't Americanized Versions of folklore beasts.

Rolemaster Classic and Spacemaster are viable systems, but the new RM books have VTT support in Roll20. It is nice to see this system back from the dead, and I hope for more PoD books and releases soon.

Despite its legendary skill bloat, the Rolemaster FRP edition is one of the best-presented versions in the series. Once you grasp the broader "skill categories" and the specialization-like skill ranks, you will see what they were trying to do with the math. The layout and

https://ironcrown.co.uk/rolemaster-version-comparison/

They have a version comparison above, which does not include the newest core system (25 areas, 3-6 skills per area). In short, RM Classic is like "B/X," and RM FRP is the "advanced set" - some like the 300+ skills of RM FRP, others like it simple with RMC and the 22 primary and 43 optional secondary skills.

RM FRP is deep and complicated. People were more intelligent in the 1990s and could grasp all this. The newest RM CORE is a middle ground between the 1990s RM FRP and the 1980s RM Classic.

DCC vs. Shadowdark

I like Shadowdark. It is the ultimate "pick up and play" version of 5E. I can be online, in a chat room, in an MMO chat window, at a convention, and invite someone to play a fantasy game with me, and be playing in 5 minutes. They can only casually know 5E, and I can hand them a character sheet and go.

No D&D Beyond is needed. No hours-long character creation. No starter set.

Shadowdark replaced 5E entirely for me. I don't need all those books and all that complexity. I can mod Shadowdark to be more pulp-action and heroic. I can keep it a deadly, horror-adjacent game as it is. I can create new classes and a new game from the core set.

And I don't need all these "big book" 5E Kickstarter games. Shadowdark can be sci-fi, modern horror, game-world specific, cowboy, historical fantasy, or anything else you want to mod the game into. All you need is a class that fits your genre, some gear, and monsters, and you can start playing anything.

If I want a quick "Star Trek" game, I can hack up some command, engineering, sciences, medical, and security classes, and we can play using the Shadowdark rules. Or I can use the Shadowdark classes and re-flavor them.

For me, Shadowdark is my 5E game.

Tales of Argosa sits on the shelf, waiting, saying, "I can do you one better..."

I will get to that game.

Dungeon Crawl Classics is pure randomness and fun. This is a heavily modded 3.5E, blended with the best of the OSR, and the game embraces flavor and randomness rather than exponential power gain. At the heart of this game is a thematic risk-versus-reward concept, and the game does not care to protect a player's ego.

DCC borrows and hacks, mods and twists, changes expectations, and does a lot with a little. The book is enormous, but the system is as easy as Shadowdark. I initially dismissed this game as "being too much" compared to OSE and other systems, but I love the game's attitude and style.

I love DCC; this is my home system, and I mostly play solo. For solo play, it has a high degree of unpredictability and randomness, which always keeps it interesting.

The dice are amazing. Every d4 is rounded and easy to pick up. There is no advantage or disadvantage; you just go up or down a die size, up for bonuses, down for penalties. You apply this mechanic to any die in the game. If your d10 polearm needs to be bumped up two levels of "damage advantage" because the dragon flew into it on an ambush, it goes up to a d14. Is your longsword worn and unsharp? Lower the d8 to a d7.

But why play DCC over Shadowdark?

Shadowdark has a very tight focus, almost like a board game. You play turn-to-turn, never leaving initiative order. There aren't "exploration turns," but you can play it that way. It is best in that turn-to-turn style, almost like a "dungeon creep" playstyle. The rules are minimalist, and the game is very "live or die" in its terms of the definition of success. Shadowdark is home to dungeons, caves, and caverns under the world's surface.

Shadowdark is also "instant play" with others. This is a killer feature—the simplicity that D&D does not have, nor has it had since the 1980s. Wizards' D&D have been these overcomplicated character-builder games for which you need computer programs to design characters. The company does not "get it" and is notorious for overdesign, broken high-level play, and bloat.

I can play Shadowdark with anyone at any time. I point them to the free starter set and a character from that, and we can play over a chat window. It is easy to a level that D&D will never have.

DCC is a love letter to the times when none of us knew what to expect. Playing it makes me feel like a kid again, seeing a beholder and saying, "Whaaaa...?" These days, the beholders and mind flayers are the overused, tired, worn-out shoes of corporate IP. It is time to retire them and put them in the Monster Hall of Fame.

DCC is expansive in scope and feeling. It is more about the sweeping saga of a band of heroes, live or die. The game embraces and celebrates change. It has a high risk-to-reward system built into almost every game aspect. DCC is home on the tops of floating mushroom isles, exploring the tear ducts of a long-dead titan, in an ancient starship lodged in a glacier flow, and in the strange and marvelous places of dreams and nightmares.

I like DCC for its craziness and over-the-top feeling. The dice, random charts, emphasis on unique monsters and adventures, and the imagination poured into all the books and adventures keep me coming back. You look at the adventure covers, saying, "What is this?" and "That looks cool" simultaneously.

Shadowdark is tight, well-put-together, mod-able, and a beautiful game that shows respect for everyone who plays it. It pays tribute to the old school while embracing enough of the new. Shadowdark can be taught and played instantly with others. At this point, Shadowdark is D&D, and the king has been replaced.

I like them both.

DCC does the big and crazy well.

Shadowdark does the small and terrifying well.

If I had to have one? It would be DCC.

Ashes to Ashes, Bytes to Bits

The news of D&D Beyond's 3D VTT being gutted is no surprise. They were never using the right strategy in the first place. They had no "3D store" in place, no creators, no 3D map makers, and no online store where they shared profits with digital content creators.

Were they just hoping new figures and maps would appear?

What were they selling without a plan?

An idea?

I have been in the consumer 3D market. You start your artist and creator programs long before the launch. You fire up the online store, and you give the creators a share for creating cool new things for your VTT. Be honest; the company isn't going to build and provide all the content themselves.

The big secret is that your content creators will help you sell the platform.

Just ask DriveThruRPG.

Then again, for performance reasons, how are you going to QA all that digital content to make sure someone shipping a model with 8K textures, with possible assets ripped from other 3d games (another major headache), won't crash your VTT and make it run out of resources? If you say you are creating it all in-house, that is a ton of work few can afford or sustain.

And the competition, even in the 3D tabletop space, is well established. Even Roll20 is a good enough experience, and I don't care if my maps are hand-drawn scribbles and my pawns are 2d images. The game isn't in what you see; it is what you see in your mind.

I don't need to play on the same map or in the same tavern every time I play D&D.

AI won't save you, either. Many in the hobby detest it.

Baldur's Gate 3 killed this. The people in the "3d experience" will be playing mods for that game for 10 years, and when Larian comes out with the spiritual successor that offers even more mod and creator support, building a platform the BG3 teased, the gaming crowd will be playing that. Whoever creates it, I am betting it is a race now that the game made a billion dollars. The next company with the "BG3-like" roleplaying platform will rake in the cash.

The OGL killed this, too. If they were able to follow through on the plan to "take it all," then no one would have anywhere else to play. They were doomed either way, win or lose.

The 5.5E rules were built for the VTT; without that, we have a system without a purpose. Even 5E relies too much on online character creation tools, which are designed into the system so they can lock you into a platform. Shadowdark is far easier to play with anyone, and it does not need online tools. Even the Open 5E creators are finding a lack of character creation tools is killing them, and they are scrambling to get those working.

D&D now has the burden of failure after failure in the digital online play space, just like they failed at movies and streaming. They can never make it work since they are not a software, entertainment, or social media company. They planned for a 10 or 20-year pandemic, and here we are.

Licensing the IP is where we go from here.

Or selling it all.

It feels like a sad "beginning of the end" from here.

I am happy I have replacements.

Mail Room: Adventures Dark and Deep

The hardcovers for ADAD came today, and wow.

Wow.

Wow.

I got both the core rulebook and bestiary. They are impressive, chunky, thick books full of first-edition goodness. Each one is an inch-and-a-half thick, totaling more than 1,000 pages of the game. If you want to play the first edition and want "more stuff" within an incredible recreation of the original rules, this game can't be beaten.

Better yet, the rules are balanced, and things remain deadly to the highest levels. If you play by the rules, you won't have invincible characters or those annoying GMNPCs that litter the Forgotten Realms. Characters are meant to gain levels, possibly do great things, grow old, leave first-level heirs, and die.

The most influential shall live on as gods' servants and not hang around in the mortal world to solve other people's problems. Elminster should have retired to become the librarian of Mystra, lived on the planes to pass wisdom, and left that terrestrial "high mage" slot open for a PC to try to take the title. If you earn that place, all the better. When the world needs him, Elminster can appear as a ghost to give the heroes quests. The Realms would have been a better place.

The world, like a garden, should live in cycles and seasons.

As a referee, your game encompasses the garden's stories.

The problem with 5E is that it treats the characters like a TV show that never ends, matures, or allows (or needs) the next generation. They stick around until we are sick of them and their superpowers and watch another show because we get tired of them. You are superheroes who never retire and never let others replace you. The game is very self-centered and inwardly focused on heroes. Gold means nothing. People never die. The planes are overly central to the game and not mysterious places of the afterlife or strange dimensions beyond.

No place in the planes should be "livable" by mortals for long. Staying out there will transform you, consume you, kill you, or drive you insane. The planes are not home to anything other than magical creatures, spirits, strange beasts, or alien life.

Remember how vulnerable you are?

No, the planes are not your home nor a place you want to remain for long.

ADAD is a game I could start a Realms or Greyhawk campaign in and savor how great everything is. Characters would be afraid and careful, but they would need to test fate to save the day. Spells would be a lost art, hard to find, and magic treasures would be unique and special. Gold would be the currency of the realm and the way for characters to quickly advance in power. The world would be filled with danger and the terrors of evil, with walls around civilization needed and armies raised to guard the way of life of a nation. Armies between nations may battle, and they would be necessary to drive back the hordes of demon-worshipping humanoids from the wastelands.

Even better, a Nerrath campaign surrounded by a random hex-crawl world. Let's send off the 4E campaign setting as a proper, first-edition place full of danger and mystery. Welcome home.

The first edition has you thinking about your future, what you will pass along, and whether you will survive to do everything you wish. You settle lands. You raise heirs. You serve the gods or kneel to darker powers. You vanquish evil or succumb to it. You build a kingdom and a future. You defeat demons. You travel to the planes and beyond.

And in the end, you pass along what you can.

You are not the story; you are a part of history.

Maybe.

If that poison dart or pit-trap full of spikes doesn't get you first.

I Can See Why...

YouTube is now suggesting first-edition videos to me.

This is because of my interest in that game version, but the platform has returned to normalcy without YouTube shoving 5E videos into my timeline. Has the money fed into YouTube to recommend videos for a specific topic or game dried up? Was a majority of the "interest" in D&D artificially inflated?

On YouTube, my hobby feels like a niche interest again.

My interest in first-edition games is now being suggested to me.

No artificial injections of "5E content" are being fed to my recommendations.

The platform, and also the hobby, feels normal to me again.

And I see OSRIC and first-edition play videos again! These are so good. I am watching people return to the early days, deal with a hardcore level of difficulty, and have all their "easy mode" 5E powers taken away. I am watching people think with their heads and not the rules.

It is so enjoyable because I can better connect with the players, observe their reasoning and problem-solving abilities, and see them think on their feet in a more challenging game.

Instead of someone screaming "eldritch blast!" I am watching someone think through a challenging situation without infinite-use powers. They are considered finite resources. They save spells for later in case they need them. They can't "take a break" and rest up everyone's hit points and powers. I get it. The design team added generous resource replenishment to "increase fun," but the game is about resource management.

Without resource management, D&D becomes "a game of rules," and the players' thought process goes out of the game and into a book. Because those books are on their phones, they watch YouTube videos or play mobile games. They don't need to pay attention because of passive skills.

D&D 5E has become subservient to mobile phones. It is a secondary activity.

Your character is likely dead if you are on a phone while playing a first-edition game. You will likely never complete a challenging adventure without paying attention and being fully engaged. There are no easy resting mechanics and no easy recovery from death. Every power is resource-constrained. Wandering monsters will drain resources and kill party members.

While combat and exploration are done turn-by-turn, if the players spend 30 minutes talking over a situation, and there are encounter checks every 10 minutes, you could make three checks in that time while they idle and argue. Time is time, and there are "real time" elements in a first edition game, just like Shadowdark.

Characters do not level up as fast, and growing old is also an enemy. A 5E character can reach level 20 in a few months or weeks of "in-game" time, and they practically never die. If I want, I can speed up advancement in 1E by giving "milestone rewards" of GP for different tasks in the story, either by leaving it around as treasure or offering it by factions as rewards for other tasks.

There are no empty "quest XP" in first-edition, so referees should give treasure or reward payouts.

"Quest XP" is XP without gold, and it hurts the monetary progression of the game, which is vital for magic item purchases, expeditions, and strongholds. Just give your players' characters gold and magic items; they will find a use for it all and thank you. AD&D 2nd Edition got it wrong when they introduced quest XP, as XP without GP is just half a reward and cheating your players.

Of course, the character better be able to haul those GP out of the dungeon, so they carry their XP on their backs and need to secure it when they return to town (or, ideally, a stronghold).

But I can see why the first edition appeals to me. The game is not about rapid advancement and power. It is about the story, the world, and you. Every little thing you do contributes to advancement, and the gold pieces you gain push you (and your domain) forward.

The powers you wield in the first edition are mighty. By definition, having to use a 5E power every turn or every encounter makes it a very weak power that needs to be used repeatedly. In the first edition, a fireball or lightning bolt was a once-per-day power that ended fights. In 5E, another weak-sauce MMO "damage per turn" power adds to party damage output. This "use the same power over and over" is a mobile-phone-game design trick, mental manipulation to make you feel powerful but really aren't, and 5E is full of them.

My story is not about "what powers I have" and "how I use them repeatedly to solve every problem."

My story is about my characters and the world they live in.

Off the Shelf: HARP

I have a renewed interest in Rolemaster, which brings HARP into the discussion. HARP is essentially a simplified Rolemaster, built to replace the old "Middle Earth" game (now not supported and licensed). HARP is a worthy game, it gives you the Rolemaster hit without all the math and layers of complexity.

Against the Darkmaster cloned the old Middle Earth game and went its own way. This is an excellent game, and it laser-focuses on the cinematic experience of "battling the evil magic overlord" and the overall world plot. HARP is on its own as the "B/X" simplified version of Rolemaster and a solid game.

Why play HARP if you have Against the Darkmaster?

HARP is your game if you are interested in Rolemaster, like the idea of critical charts, and want an easier-to-learn, more straightforward system with a complete set of books. Also, while we wait for Rolemaster to get its full set of books, this system is fully supported and a "complete library" game with its eight-volume core set. HARP is also easier to modify to support your custom worlds since the rules are straightforward and simple, and the concepts transfer easily.

Against the Darkmaster is like playing endless Lord of the Rings movie clones. That is a great thing, and I love the concept! It takes a strong game concept and expands it with random charts and different bad guys, and all of a sudden, you are playing your own epic story.

With HARP, you are more in generic fantasy. The story will be up to you. You can make this about your own " Middle Earth" style story or do whatever you want with the game. You take a few steps back from the Middle Earth inspirations and move towards generic fantasy stories and tales. You don't need a Darkmaster or an epic arc; your stories can be as small or grand as you want.

HARP books and creators! Please check out the video & give a like and sub!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Y8ju1AXW0

HARP is a complete game that is still supported and in print. Three months ago, the video (the one I covered earlier about the 2025 releases) covered the Iron Crown convention table with Rolemaster and HARP books. HARP is being sold as the "easier" Rolemaster, where you don't need to worry about the high levels of customization and complexity. You can see in the screenshot that the table is covered with HARP books. This system is still viable, supported, and being sold (even the SF version, which will be more on that later).

HARP is a skill-based system where your levels of skills and how you choose to raise them determine character power. Your adventures will be completing tasks requiring skill use, exploration, combat, interactions, and managing resources carefully. Skills will be at the center of everything.

More importantly, the degree of success matters. Trying to convince a village there is a troll raid coming? The degree of success of your dice roll will determine if one guard with cloth armor and a spear is added to the town watch or twenty heavily armed soldiers are on the ready with leadership.

HARP also has the critical hit charts for Rolemaster in the HARP Martial Law book. They are not 100% the same as Rolemaster's charts, but they increase the variety of special effects by a considerable degree and handle them in a shade more simplicity without sacrificing variety.

The expanded HARP critical hit tables in Martial Law have similar numbers of entries as Rolemaster Unified (195 to 200 for crushing). Still, HARP puts the top chart axis as "hit location" instead of A to E severity. HARP still has the "high-end" results, but fewer of them, and a more granular progression of location-based injuries covering more low to middle-end wounding results.

With any chart result, you can always change them or improvise, so the argument of not having one or the other specific result is meaningless with a bit of imagination. An "elbow damaged" result could easily be shifted to the wrist, hand, or shoulder, so now you have four potential results inside one. An "ear cut off" result could be a nose or teeth knocked out. A "leg torn off" or "lower leg bone break" result can be interpreted in many gruesome ways.

If I use this method, a chart with 200 results quickly explodes to over 1,000 per attack type. In fact, HARP makes it easier to improvise and customize results like this because one chart axis is hit location, and the higher numbers are severity. I can go side-to-side and replace or add effects to the hit, so a severe arm hit could knock someone down (or unconscious). My over 1,000 chart results can have various similar-magnitude effects, as needed, increasing variety by another fivefold to 5,000 results.

Watch horror movies and use your imagination, and you will have more results than you will ever need. HARP could be modded into a "Terrifier meets D&D" game quickly, and by default, it can play like that. Simpler games are more straightforward to mod.

The HARP Bestiary is a fantastic book with nearly 500 pages of monsters. It is a thick tome (and in color), as seen in the video. This book is why the Rolemaster Unified Bestiary will be a two-book set. The monsters are "different" from the shopworn D&D and OSR standards, which I like. You won't know what to expect, and even human enemies are dangerous if they get a few serious critical chart results on you.

The HARP Folkways book is an excellent discussion on "races in fantasy settings" and opens the door for you to create your own worlds and those who inhabit them. There are sections describing the inspirations of HARP, which are:

• Middle Earth
• The Book of the New Sun
• The Farseer Trilogies
• Chronicles of Thomas Covenant
• A Song of Ice and Fire
• World of Warcraft

HARP developed the "race plus culture" character creation method in 2003, a generation before D&D figured it out. We stepped back from Middle Earth, but much more is now available. Imagine a HARP-ized World of Warcraft setting where orc tribes battle with brutal critical chart results in tribal combat for leadership in challenging times under Alliance assault. You can even do this without WoW and just use that as an inspiration.

But mixing Middle Earth, Game of Thrones, and World of Warcraft is a tremendous inspiration and subset of fantasy genres. This is a "peanut butter plus chocolate" blend of genres, and I could get decades of gaming out of my own world built along these themes.

Where Rolemaster does Rolemaster well, HARP is the more straightforward game that does everything else better. I can mod a simple game to be anything. With Rolemaster, I see it doing the same thing as HARP, but with a lot more work and understanding needed of the core system. Also, Rolemaster is in development, and I am waiting for the bestiary. HARP has a fantastic bestiary of monsters waiting to be used as foes.

HARP also has a science fiction game that feels like a simplified Spacemaster. This provides critical charts for modern weapons in a streamlined format, but the book does tell you to customize and elaborate on the hits so they do not get repetitive. The game gives you a hit location chart, so take a "rolled effect" plus "hit location" and invent a realistic damage effect (based on severity). The critical charts from HARP Martial Law are also usable. I would love to have new critical charts for this game but expanded like Martial Law.

The races and campaign setting are okay, but I would create my own or stick with humans only. An "Extreme" add-on book gives rules for starships and vehicles. Is it worth playing and compelling in 2025? If you like Spacemaster and the ICE systems and want something easier to run, then yes.

Also, all of the above HARP books are usable with it, especially the bestiary. Reskin all those beasts, and you have a science fiction game that is more than complete.

This game feels like "Generic 1980s Science Fiction Movie: The Game, Direct to Video Edition," which is glorious. Staying away from modern burned-out sci-fi corpo-franchises and using your imagination is good, especially nowadays. After all, many of those who did were taking "Cowboy Movie" plus "Samurai Movie" plus "Adventure Serial" and adding lasers and robots. Conversely, we have "Benevolent Navy Drama" on "Interesting Planet of the Week." Or how about "Space Monsters Meet Evil Corporations?"

It is all formula, people.

The franchise name does not matter, and your game does not have to be a sequel.

HARP is worthy, complete, in-print, and supported. Like Castles & Crusades, it was released in the early 2000s and has a pedigree and robustness few other games have. Try HARP if you bounced off Rolemaster due to complexity or want something faster and easier to play.

Being easier does not mean "lesser."

In fact, easier means the game is more open to your imagination.