Discussing problems with D&D/d20 rules...

[Aaron2]

Runequest

Harn sounds alot like Runequest (a game I played for years). The problem with games where you can die at any time is that, as a player, you eventually get overwelmed by the shear futility of it all. Unless your playing a multi-generation Pendragonesque campaign, you character inevitably turn into brutal murderous hedonists, living only for the moment. Honorable combat is too risky; quests are too dangerous.

You can get a pretty good low fantasy game in D&D by just making it low level. Start at 0th level with low stats, ignore the max hit point at first level rule, dramatically cut the XP awards.

Aaron

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

If I was going to run a Harn game, based on what I've been told of the setting I'd use GURPS.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

My reasons: there are no rules for designing a prestige class, or how to design good feat progression.

Do you mean "rules for" or "examples of"? I don't think you need rules for either of these. Feat progressions, especially, should be pretty self-evident. Although more examples of either would have been nice, the Prestige Classes in the DMG seem to be pretty good as examples of both how to make Prestige Classes, and of feat progressions in use.

Furthermore, I feel that the core classes are balanced solely for the dungeon. If you take them out of such a limitted setting where they are allowed to kill 90% of what they encounter and put them in a game that is not continuous fighting, spellcasters will have a clear advantage due to versatility. We must find a way to make feats and skills more versatile! Still wouldn't help the monk though

I agree with you to an extent on this. The feat and skill systems work fine; it would be nice to find ways to use them in different, non-dungeon settings. This is more a job for examples, rather than rules-changes.

 

[Patrick-S&S]

Re: Runequest

Harn sounds alot like Runequest (a game I played for years). The problem with games where you can die at any time is that, as a player, you eventually get overwelmed by the shear futility of it all. Unless your playing a multi-generation Pendragonesque campaign, you character inevitably turn into brutal murderous hedonists, living only for the moment. Honorable combat is too risky; quests are too dangerous.

That all depends on what type of sessions you are having doesn't it? I have been gaming Hârn with HârnMaster for over 13 years exclusively and I have never been exposed to what you write above. True the players are cautious when entering a battle but they do not turn into murderous hedonists etc. IMO it is all in how your characters act to the dangers presented to them. If there is any danger at all. RPG does not equal killing you know...

But you are otherwise right with the D&D thing.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Re: Runequest

You can get a pretty good low fantasy game in D&D by just making it low level. Start at 0th level with low stats, ignore the max hit point at first level rule, dramatically cut the XP awards.

Aaron

Another way to do it is to use the NPC classes in the DMG for PC classes.

 

[Celebrim]

Well, I have no particular experience with Harn or Harnmaster, save that I had always heard a good report of it as a 'serious' RPG.

However, after listening to KK's description, I can definately tell that its not a system for me. If I want a degree of realism, I'll use GURPS, CoC, Chill, or even a modified D20. Harnmaster sounds like another crappy wound-based table-based specific-damage system like I decided to design back when I was 15 before I saw the light. Frankly, if someone is going to preach to me about how good the combat system is, he should not tell me how funny it is when the player gets shot through the nose/disembowled and trips on his own guts/throat slit and suffocating on his own blood/shot twice through the head before he could fall/etc. and other purient table results. That isn't gritty. It isn't even interesting. It's just geeks gawfawing over childish things.

There is not one thing KK is doing with Harnmaster that I couldn't do with D20, yah, even D&D. In fact, there isn't anything about his setting that I haven't done BEFORE using a lesser rules set. In fact, I dare say that none of D20's problems have to do with its inability to handle low-magic low-fantasy gritiness (provided that's really what the DM wants). And if more gritiness is desired the WP/VP system is an excellent example of how easily you can add. Heck, I even have a house rules called shots system that works really darn well at low levels of play, and if you want to keep it at a low level of play you just restrict XP and magic sufficiently and brutally grind in the day to day hardships of low tech life (as anyone with a few courses in medieval history and access to a good academic library can do).

 

[Desdichado]

Re: Re: Runequest

Another way to do it is to use the NPC classes in the DMG for PC classes.

Or change the death from massive damage threshold ala d20 Call of Cthulhu. Lot's of ways to get low-powered, scary, gritty settings utilizing core d20 mechanics with very minor tweaking.

KK, I think perhaps one of the reasons you love Harn so much right now is the fact that it gives you such vivid descriptions of the results of combat, and that the detail really stands out to you. But, honestly, doesn't that just make your infatuation with the setting and system something that's based more on the novelty of it rather than its inherent virtues? Or do you see yourself doing this forever?

For me, many aspects of the Harn system and setting both are attractive. I like gritty. I like low-powered. I like detail. I don't necessarily like the Harn specific detail, or the "real medieval" feel. I don't like more complicated combat (more scary yes -- more complicated no.) I think what I want from magic can be easily adapted from CoC or Star Wars. So although Harn seems to be a realitively good fit for me, I'd still rather homebrew with a tweaked d20.

WHFRP sounds like it has a lot of the same things you like about Harn, KK. Have you ever looked at that setting/system?

 

[Patrick-S&S]

Harnmaster sounds like another crappy wound-based table-based specific-damage system like I decided to design back when I was 15 before I saw the light.

Then you have most definately read it completely wrong since HârnMaster is nothing of the kind, not even by a longshot. Remember that KK is still learning the system but I am not. His version is kinda of accurate but does not tell the whole story. And why all the geek naming? I see no reason for it at all since no one has been rude to you that I know of. And if you would have created HârnMaster as a 15 year old then by God I would have been your biggest fan. Or should I write geek?

Sigh...

 

[Patrick-S&S]

Re: Re: Re: Runequest

WHFRP sounds like it has a lot of the same things you like about Harn, KK. Have you ever looked at that setting/system?

Although I am not KK I have gamed both Hârn and Warhammer and no they are not the same at all. Warhammer is a great game but it does not have the debt and detail that we Hârnfans find so great about the Hârn setting. No other game has, and not a single one comes close IMO. And about KK's lasting feel for Hârn... Well many of the Hârnfans started gaming it in the early 80ies and have done so since. I have exclusively since 1989...

 

[Celebrim]

Patrick-S&S: I said, "...as anyone with a few courses in medieval history and access to a good academic library can do."

That and the fact that I'm posting on a BBS for a RPG fan site should indicate something.

I consider myself a geek. All my friends are geeks. I'm married to a geek. I don't feel comfortable around people who aren't geeks. I think geeks are (generally) cool. I'm not being insulting (intentionally). I'm merely refering to an experience that all geeks should have so as to underline the sort of combat experience he seems to be talking about in HarnMaster.

As to no other world setting being nearly so detailed. That's probably true of published settings, but certainly not true of RPG settings in general. For instance, I've often heard it said of Talislanta that its biggest problem is so much of the setting is in the Professor's head that no one else can actually run the setting the way it really is supposed to be run.