HACKMASTER Basic - for free!

KJSEvans · Aug 13, 2012

GMforPowergamers said:
1st yes... 100x yes. In this world way more people jump to a conclusion then make an informed desision.

2nd what is the parody of the 1e theif... Only looking out for [URL=http://www.enworld.org/forum/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1]#1 [/URL] and stealing money (even from his own party)... And makeing a rule that not only supports but encourages that parody is the problem.

Knights of the dinner table is funny and all to real, but when those moments ccome up where my players act that way I want it to be inspite of the system not inspired from it

I suppose I could be mistaken, but having read the HMb and PHB sections on honor, and having read the alignment chapters and the class descriptions, I'm pretty sure that the context of 'looking out for number 1' is specifically in reference to why a thief doesn't act, for example, like a cleric (such as through joining a religious order). It is nowhere said, nor implied, that a thief SHOULD rob his comrades or betray them. Just that he could. And that would pertain more toward his alignment, rather than his class.

Basically, you can certainly take any one line from the HMb (or, for that matter, from something written in Pathfinder or 4E) and, out of context, determine that it's a reason to dislike the game. But as somebody who has played/run the game for about two years now, I can only present to you the following facts...

*Thieves serve a vital role in any party, especially pertaining to trap avoidance and even, actually, helping a group become combat ready. A thief has the tendency to 'go first,' as they are less likely to be surprised when combat is initiated. In HackMaster, a ready character can mitigate the surprise of the fighter who is likely to have a slower reaction time.

*No character, even of the same race and class, is likely to be 'played the same.' Based on alignment, quirks, flaws, talents and proficiencies, each and every character that I've seen has been quite different. I have seen the cut-throat thief, the guy who stole from his party and eventually killed one, but most thief-types have been simply helpful and valuable. There was no honor penalty for that - they were playing their characters, and were rewarded as such in honor and experience points.

In any case, it would certainly be silly of somebody to assume that everybody will like a game - or for that matter, will even like it for the same reason. If HackMaster isn't for you, GM, or for Zelkon, then no amount of persuasion will change your mind. However, I would only hope two things (and would hope this for any game you'd take the time to discuss, or read about): don't make a quick judgment based on the opinion of someone who might have skimmed the book, and more importantly, play the game before you come to a determination yourself.

For me, it's the only game I've ever played that's held my interest after two years. I can't get enough of it. Cheers, and game on!

griffonwing · Aug 13, 2012

Honor also involves alignment. So when you add all of these together, Class type, Alignment, Racial tendancies, Background, Quirks, Flaws, you have a character that is unique. A thief character that has the Greedy, Swindler, and or Miser quirk will be more inclined to screw over the party when it comes to wealth or treasure. Not based upon him just being a Thief, but based upon his individual quirks.

A Thief with the Nagging Conscious quirk might try to screw over the party, but should inevitably give it all back.

Again, the Honor you receive is not based solely on the ideal that a thief "Only looks out for #1 and steals from the party", and nor does this game encourage such behaviour, not unless the "entire package" dictates such.

And if your thief ends up with this tendancy, simply spend 1 BP and roll another quirk. Or maybe the GM will be kind enough to remove certain quirks from the game, or even ease up on the Honor restrictions.

Again, this game is all about hard choices, but even more so, it's all about fun. Take out what you don't like, Keep what you do.

GMforPowergamers · Aug 13, 2012

First of all I love the retro clones (except pathfinder)

Second pointing out why something isn't the best doesn't mean you need to defend it

Third, my point is that when mechanics lean toward parody of a game and people also comment on it trying to shake that image, maybe the image problem comes from something

Treebore · Aug 13, 2012

Zelkon said:
No, my point is it kills any hope of a good thief. Each class is expected to act one way, and if they don't, they are penalized.

I can only assume your missing something. I ran Hackmaster Basic for over 8 months, using Quirks and Flaws and the Honor system, and had 4 different people play a thief in that time, and every last one of them played a "good" thief. Then after that I played in a game for several months, because I wanted to try out the mage as a player. There was two thieves in that game, and both of them never screwed over the party. They were "good" thieves.

So all I can suggest at this point is to actually try playing the game and see how all the rules actually come together, because from my perspective, your missing something very critical.

If you simply end up not liking the game, I can understand that too. I haven't played in about a year now, and have no desire to play it ever again. Not that I won't, I don't dislike the game, there are just simply many other RPG's I am actually motivated to spend my time with.

griffonwing · Aug 13, 2012

GMforPowergamers said:
First of all I love the retro clones (except pathfinder)

Second pointing out why something isn't the best doesn't mean you need to defend it

Third, my point is that when mechanics lean toward parody of a game and people also comment on it trying to shake that image, maybe the image problem comes from something

I simply see no parody at all in this game. There is humor, yes, but there is no parody. This system was built from the ground up, incorportating different mechanics than DnD. HM4e was a full-blown parody, it's true. This new edition is not; it is it's own creation.

That, really, is my only defense. I don't even see this as a retro-clone

Treebore · Aug 13, 2012

griffonwing said:
I simply see no parody at all in this game. There is humor, yes, but there is no parody. This system was built from the ground up, incorportating different mechanics than DnD. HM4e was a full-blown parody, it's true. This new edition is not; it is it's own creation.

That, really, is my only defense. I don't even see this as a retro-clone

Yeah, this is no where close to being a "retro clone". Very new rules set. The only RPG this shares any similarities with is Kenzers own Aces and Eights, and even then there are a lot of differences, in how you build characters, how skill works, and even how combat works, starting with initiative all the way to how attacks are resolved, let alone the addition of magic.

KJSEvans · Aug 13, 2012

GMforPowergamers said:
First of all I love the retro clones (except pathfinder)

Second pointing out why something isn't the best doesn't mean you need to defend it

I'm not really interested in persuading anyone that HM is the "best" - that would be silly. Lots of folks have their favorites for the simple reason that they like them the best. It'd be hard to refute that.

However, in responding to someone who says a game is "garbage," or to someone who makes assumptions about a game, I can only point out that there are likely folks reading this thread who have never read - or perhaps even heard of - the game. As this is a forum in which information is shared, it only makes sense that any opinion made or gained is an informed one. Therefore, not addressing incorrect assumptions or criticisms about a game may be seen by some as a tantamount acknowledgment that said criticisms are fair.

Third, my point is that when mechanics lean toward parody of a game and people also comment on it trying to shake that image, maybe the image problem comes from something

From time to time I've heard of folks who simply refuse to consider that the current version of HM is deadly serious - but I'd never encountered any before. I wouldn't consider this reputation to be a "problem," however. If that is your opinion of the game, you are already rightly in the minority.

Many folks may have extremely valid reasons for not loving HM as much as enthusiasts such as myself - but I feel that all such reasons basically boil down to experience playing the game and, most importantly, personal preference. Please don't confuse my "defense" of the game as an attempt to change your mind; rather I am just here to provide information!

GMforPowergamers · Aug 13, 2012

Treebore said:
Yeah, this is no where close to being a "retro clone". Very new rules set. The only RPG this shares any similarities with is Kenzers own Aces and Eights, and even then there are a lot of differences, in how you build characters, how skill works, and even how combat works, starting with initiative all the way to how attacks are resolved, let alone the addition of magic.

I consider it part of a set of games (called hack master) that started as a retro clone and parody... I am unsure if it really out grew that.

KJSEvans · Aug 13, 2012

GMforPowergamers said:
I consider it part of a set of games (called hack master) that started as a retro clone and parody... I am unsure if it really out grew that.

If you feel that way, but interact with folks who've played the game and universally say your assumption is incorrect, but you still feel that way, then it seems pretty clear that you made up your mind even before interacting with anyone. I don't quite know what that accomplishes for you - maybe it makes it easier for you to avoid investing your time and money in a game you're prepared to dislike?

In any case, I'm sure folks can make up their own minds about HM. What's really important is that you are having fun playing ANY game - more gamers is always better!

Zelkon · Aug 13, 2012

Treebore said:
I can only assume your missing something. I ran Hackmaster Basic for over 8 months, using Quirks and Flaws and the Honor system, and had 4 different people play a thief in that time, and every last one of them played a "good" thief. Then after that I played in a game for several months, because I wanted to try out the mage as a player. There was two thieves in that game, and both of them never screwed over the party. They were "good" thieves.

So all I can suggest at this point is to actually try playing the game and see how all the rules actually come together, because from my perspective, your missing something very critical.

If you simply end up not liking the game, I can understand that too. I haven't played in about a year now, and have no desire to play it ever again. Not that I won't, I don't dislike the game, there are just simply many other RPG's I am actually motivated to spend my time with.

Hopefuly I can some day, but my group hardly ever meets and none of us have any more money to experement with. It's not really my style, anyway. I hate old school.