Editing Rolemaster (section)

==Reception==
In the August 1984 edition of ''[[Dragon (magazine)|Dragon]]'' (Issue #88), Arlen Walker queried whether the hefty $48 price tag for the second edition boxed set was worth the money, and provided a long and in-depth examination of the box's contents. Walker had quibbles over the combat system, which seemed to generalize rather than individualize weapons; and he felt the book on animal encounters had very little information about the actual animals. Walker concluded, "Is the ''Rolemaster'' system worth the $48, then? The answer is a resounding 'maybe.' If you want a freer, more open game than you are currently playing, I’d say it is probably worth it. Even with the inconsistencies noted it still allows more freedom of choice than almost any other game. Although the physical size of the game is rather imposing, the actual mechanics run rather smoothly and simply."<ref name=dragon88>{{cite journal|last=Walker|first=Arlen| date=August 1984 |title=ICE can stand the heat: A long look at Iron Crown's Rolemaster series|journal=[[Dragon (magazine)|Dragon]]|publisher=[[TSR (company)|TSR, Inc.]]|issue=88|pages=64–68}}</ref>

Walker also reviewed the separately published books ''Character Law'', ''Campaign Law'', ''Spell Law'', ''Claw Law'' and ''Arms Law''. 
* '''[[Character Law]]''' Although Walker liked the ability to move randomly generated ability scores around to produce the most beneficial results for the character class sought, he disagreed with the system of rolling dice ten times in order to generate character abilities, and then raising two of those abilities up to 90, if they were not already 90 or better. Walker felt this created a monochrome cast of characters and non-player characters. Walker liked the different ways that characters could gain experience points, such as travel, having religious experiences such as visions, and for coming up with a brilliant idea — although he thought this one would probably lead to arguments over which player had originally voiced the germ of the idea. But he didn't like the idea that characters get experience points for dying.
* '''[[Spell Law]]''' Walker was impressed with the variety of spells detailed in ''Spell Law'', numbering over two thousand. He found that the "spell-casting system is somewhat more complicated than in other games, but not unplayably so."
* '''[[Arms Law]]''' He had quibbles about ''Arms Law'' — combat was very fast and lethal due to the high amount of damage inflicted by a single blow, and he believed that new players used to other role-playing systems should be made aware of this. Walker also questioned why a character could not parry with a two-handed weapon, although he realized it was probably "a concession to speed of play."
* '''[[Claw Law]]''' Walker criticized the lack of descriptions of the animals covered in ''Claw Law'', saying, "The animal descriptions have little if anything to do with animals. Calling them descriptions, in fact, is probably overstating the case dramatically... We are told nothing else about the animal, including what it looks like, where it can be found, and how it will behave if found." Walker went on to question why "Historical Weapons" were found in this book, which was supposed to be about damage from animals and monsters, rather than in ''Arms Law''. He also criticized the lack of variety these weapons represented, since to calculate damage and other combat-related numbers for these exotic weapons, referees were simply referred to equivalent weapons in ''Arms Law''. "For example, if you wish to have your character use a Katana, you use the same chart as if he were using a broadsword. The cover blurbs (for ''Arms Law'') say, 'Because a mace is not an arrow or a scimitar...' yet this section says a broadsword is both a long sword and a sabre (as well as a Katana) and a dart is a dagger, because they use the same tables."
* '''[[Campaign Law]]''' Unlike the first four books, Walker had high praise for ''Campaign Law'', saying, "Whether you’re looking for a new system to run or not, ''Campaign Law'' is definitely worth the $10 price of admission. The information and guidelines this book will give you on fleshing out and filling in a consistent campaign world are almost invaluable. All I can say is that if this book had been available when I first began running campaigns, it would have saved me at least a year of development time."<ref name=dragon88 />

[[Rick Swan]] reviewed various editions of the game system:
* In his 1990 book ''[[The Complete Guide to Role-Playing Games]]'', Swan thought that the second edition game system "reads more like a collection of supplements than an integrated system ... it's still extraordinarily complicated and by no means for beginners." Swan concluded by giving the game a rating of 2.5 out of 4, saying, "''Rolemaster'' lacks the flavor of classic fantasy RPGs such as ''[[Advanced Dungeons & Dragons]]'' and ''[[Runequest]]'', coming off as a dull collection of numbers and tables."<ref name=swan>{{cite book | last =Swan  | first =Rick | author-link=Rick Swan |title =[[The Complete Guide to Role-Playing Games]] | publisher =St. Martin's Press | date =1990 | location =New York | pages =172–174}}</ref> 
* In the September 1995 edition of ''Dragon'' (Issue 221), Swan reviewed the updated 144-page ''Arms Law'' book that had been released in conjunction with the revised ''Rolemaster Standard System'' edition. Swan still found the complexity of the ''Rolemaster'' system astounding, saying, "With its tidal wave of numbers, formulas, and tables, the ''Rolemaster'' game always struck me as the kind of fantasy RPG that calculus professors play on their day off." Swan found ''Arms Law'' to be "mainly a book of tables — more than 100 pages worth." He gave the book an average rating of 4 out of 6, and recommended it only for the mathematically inclined: "If you read computer manuals for fun, if you get misty-eyed thinking about your high school algebra class, if you wonder why your friends complain about something as trivial as filling out tax forms, then ''Rolemaster'' ought to be right up your alley. ''Arms Law'' is as good a place as any to begin your investigation."<ref name=dragon221>{{cite magazine|last=Swan|first=Rick|author-link=Rick Swan| date=September 1992 |title=Roleplaying Reviews|magazine=[[Dragon (magazine)|Dragon]]|issue=221|pages=68}}</ref>
* In the July 1996 edition of ''Dragon'' (Issue 231), Swan reviewed the new supplement ''[[Arcane Companion]]'' that had been published in conjunction with the revision of the magic system in  the ''Rolemaster Standard System'' edition. Swan reiterated that the ''Rolemaster'' system was a mathematician's delight: "Saturated with charts and numbers, it's for players who buy pocket calculators by the crate... If you're the kind of guy who needs his fingers to do arithmetic, this ain't your kind of game." Despite this, Swan found ''Arcane Companion'' to be "not only comprehensible, but entertaining, thanks to the designers’ efforts to infuse the facts and figures with vivid imagery." Swan concluded that because this supplement was so solidly linked to the ''Rolemaster'' system, it could not be ported to another game system, but "experienced players should welcome this ambitious expansion with open arms. And if you’re among those who’ve dismissed ''Rolemaster'' as not worth the effort, sneak a peek at ''Arcane Companion''; it might tempt you to reconsider."<ref name=dragon231>{{cite magazine|last=Swan|first=Rick|author-link=Rick Swan| date=July 1996 |title=Roleplaying Reviews|magazine=[[Dragon (magazine)|Dragon]]|issue=231|pages=109–110}}</ref>

In a 1996 reader poll conducted by UK games magazine ''Arcane'' to determine the 50 best roleplaying systems, ''Rolemaster'' was ranked 15th. ''Arcane'' editor Paul Pettengale commented: "Often used as an archetypal example of a complex roleplaying system, ''Rolemaster'' is a fairly numbers-heavy game that also relies on the use of a lot of tables. Most notable are its notorious 'critical hit' charts, which are subdivided by damage type and describe various horrific wounds in graphic detail. If you're looking for a highly detailed and fairly complex system, ''Rolemaster'' has a great deal to recommend it. The rules are fairly well organised and very flexible, easily adaptable to a wide variety of situations. On the other hand, if you're not one for tables and calculations, it's probably not going to ring your bell."<ref name="arcane">{{cite magazine|last= Pettengale|first=Paul|date= Christmas 1996 |title=Arcane Presents the Top 50 Roleplaying Games 1996|magazine=Arcane|issue=14|pages=25–35}}</ref>

Scott Taylor for ''[[Black Gate (magazine)|Black Gate]]'' in 2013 rated ''Rolemaster'' as #6 in the top ten role-playing games of all time, saying "Also attributed to the frame of the ''Middle-Earth Role-Playing Game'', which was the 2nd most popular fantasy RPG of the 1980s, I.C.E.'s ''Rolemaster'' must certainly make a showing as something of a heavyweight in the industry, even if it no longer exists as an entity".<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.blackgate.com/2013/06/10/art-of-the-genre-the-top-10-role-playing-games-of-all-time/ | title=Art of the Genre: The Top 10 Role-Playing Games of All-Time – Black Gate | date=10 June 2013 }}</ref>