Discussion of HARP (as requested by PirateCat)

[Piratecat]

And until it becomes second nature, it's a problem that you have to look at the maneuver table for quite some many things. I think a GM screen is a MUST for HARP.

Interesting. I liked a lot of what I saw when I scanned through HARP, but I got this impression too -- and it's one of the reasons I haven't played it yet. I generally won't run a game if I have to regularly stop and look at the rules more than once or twice during a typical session. It's weird, but my tolerance for that has really gone down as I've gotten older.

 

[Rasyr]

My only thought at the moment is.....it seems like the Cultures, Professions and Packages would run into each other, each trying to get the same thing done. At least Packages and Professions seems like two competing game mechanics that do the same thing.

Not really. Professions determine the focus of generalized training, i.e. a Fighter normally concentrates on martial skills, thus those are easier for him to learn, while a Mage concentrates on Mystical ones, making them easier to learn. Thus they set the overall cost of skills for a character

Training Packages are groups of *specific* skills learned for a given purpose (job/group/etc.) For example, the Thieve's Guild may offer specialized training to its members. This specialized training is reflected in Training Packages, and you have the following:
Pickpocket
Burglar
Con Man
etc...

Each teaches those skills related to that specialty, such as for the Pickpocket TP, you get some ranks in Duping, Trickery, and Pick Pockets, perhaps a few ranks in Acting as well.

It doesn't matter whether the trainee is a Rogue, a Thief, or even a Monk (the profession determines the cost of the package, not the training gained), any may learn it.

You can even have prerequisites for TPs if you like, such as requiring a specific talent or other TP before being eligible for the Training Package.

 

[Rasyr]

First of all, the GM section is inadequate. Considering HARPs XP system where the party is awarded after completing adventure goals, there's very little advice on designing adventures. Ther's some blah blah about estimating this and that, but really. Until you know the system, this is just not possible. Anyone knows that. And what about the poor novice GM? HARP needs an adventure design chapter and a way to estimate the threat of challenges. Something d20 excels at (how accurate d20 is, is another matter...).

We will eventually produce a GM's Guide for HARP. It isn't actually designed for the novice player or GM. The goal of a GM's Guide would be to include all the information needed for the novice GM, from world building to adventure design and everything in between....

And please give us a NPC table lvls 1-20 like the DMG has! I already have tears in my eyes when I think of all the NPCs I will have to design and make on the fly in a new, skill intensive system

Gah! Somebody who wants MORE tables!!! Can I run and scream now?

Actually, unless you are planning on fully detailing lots of NPCs, there is a simpler method. In the beginning of the Skills chapter, there are two small tables. One gives the max number of ranks per level, and the other the bonus for a given number of ranks. Using these two tables, you can very quickly determine the skill bonus of an NPC. If it is a primary skill for the NPC then give them 3 ranks per level plus 3 ranks. If important, but not primary, then give them 2 ranks per level, otherwise give one rank per level or less. Add in stat bonuses, and boom, all done.

An NPC table would also make it much more easier to design those monsters that are not fighters that HARP keeps talking about. What skills does the various professions max out in? And why the hell does all monsters have 75 in all stats?! Why not a non stat bonus number? That way, I can add 5 here and 5 there is the party meets a particulary nasty orc. Now, I have to deduct 10 from most of the numbers if I want to create an 'ordinary' orc. Hopefully, Monsters: A Field Guide takes care of that...

Actually, Orcs are not in Monsters: A Field Guide. Very few of the monsters from the HARP rules are. (Note: Monsters was written by Rob Baxter, who had material in Monsternomicrom - end blatant plug).

There is not anything that really says this profession must max out in this skill, etc.... There are a number of skills that are more important to certain professions...

Fighters - combat skills
Monks - Chi skills & Martial Arts skills
Magic Users - Mystical Arts skills, especially spells and Power Point Dev.
Sneaky Characters - Subterfuge skills..

All Professions - Endurance, Resistance, Perception, riding, swimming, stalk&hide, Climbing, etc.... (look at the sidebar listing important skills in the skills chapter - it gives a big hint hehe).

Also, an NPC table might tall us something about how much treasure/wealth characters are supposed to have at levels above 1st.

Okay, here is something that is much different from D&D. There is NOTHING that says a character will or will not have a given amount of magic at a given level. That is up to the GM and the setting being used to determine. If you want to give them more magic, then do so! If not, then don't! That simple. Just remember that if a monster or bad guy has a magic item, he WILL use it.

 

[Rasyr]

Interesting. I liked a lot of what I saw when I scanned through HARP, but I got this impression too -- and it's one of the reasons I haven't played it yet. I generally won't run a game if I have to regularly stop and look at the rules more than once or twice during a typical session. It's weird, but my tolerance for that has really gone down as I've gotten older.

Over on another forum, I was discussing with somebody how to run a game of HARP without using tables at all (i.e. no maneuver table).

Given how the difficulty levels are set up this should be easily possible. See below for a rough outline of how to do it:

There are nine difficulty levels (with #4 being medium with no mod - meaning a 101 or better succeeds).

For handling All-or-Nothing skills, no table is required. You roll add bonuses and mods and if total is 101 or better, success.

For handling Percentage type rolls (i.e. how far is something completed), just make a maneuver roll and the amount over 100 is the percentage completed.

For Bonus type rolls (i.e. roll one skill to get bonus to another), just roll first skill and for every difficulty level above the one required, gain a +10 to the second skill. Thus if trying to make a Hard Lock Lore maneuver (-20 to roll, total of 101 or higher required OR total of 121 or higher required), if you succeed high enough to beat a Very Hard maneuver, (20 points more than required for the Hard maneuver) you get a +10 to the Pick Locks maneuver.


For RRs - the attacking effect rolls (spell, poison, etc.) and the total of the roll is then used to determine the difficulty of the RR. For example, you cast a spell and get a total of 153. This is more than would be needed to succeed for a Very Hard maneuver (which would require 141+), but not high enough to succeed at an Extremely Hard maneuver (requiring 161+), thus the defender must roll his RR and beat a Very Hard maneuver (141+) or be affected by the spell.

For Utility Spells, these are Easy to cast (+20 to casting roll -- 101 or higher to succeed). If the total roll is enough to beat a Very Hard maneuver (141 or higher), then the caster gets to double 1 aspect of the spell as per the table. If they succeed by enough to beat a Sheer Folly maneuver (181 or higher) they get to double two aspects of the spell, etc...

For combat, to do that without tables, use the Life Points options.

******************************
There you go, a way to play HARP without looking anything up.

I would like to point out however, that the relevant tables are available in the free PDFs on the HARP website, and could easily be printed out and used in something like that customizable GM screen that somebody sells (cannot remember the name of it just at the moment - hehe).

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

We will eventually... >snip<

Thanks for all the answers.
One more question: Why can only Monks perform multiple attacks? Would it be too unbalancing to make it posible for all characters to use the multiple attacks rule with melle weapons? At the very least, they too should be able to use martial arts like monks, IMO.

 

[lord_banus]

An important thing to remember in HARP is that a round is only 2 seconds, not a lot of time for multiple attacks. Monks get multiple attacks because they are using multiple weapons like fists, feet, head, elbows etc which can be used simultaneously. For matial weapons it takes time to swing them around. However saying that there are options for multiple attacks with weapons, firstly the old standard of having 2 weapons, one in each hand, next are the advanced combat maneuvers from Martial Law namely double slash and triple slash.

One major think that I found in HARP compared to DND is that tactics are performed in a number of rounds rather than the usual 1 round in dnd due to the shorter time scale.

 

[Rasyr]

Thanks for all the answers.
One more question: Why can only Monks perform multiple attacks? Would it be too unbalancing to make it posible for all characters to use the multiple attacks rule with melle weapons? At the very least, they too should be able to use martial arts like monks, IMO.

Actually, there are a couple of different methods that non-Monks can get multiple attacks (also that Martial Arts attacks do less damage than weapon attacks). First, there is Two Weapon Combo, which allows multiple attacks when wielding two weapons.

Secondly, in Martial Law, the Combat Actions are expanded from a single level to 4 levels (Basic, Advanced, Expert and Legendary), with the availability of the Combat Action being based upon your number of ranks with your weapon. Included in the Advanced Combat Actions is one that allows for multiple attacks. Martial Law includes several other weapon styles for multiple weapons, and even a style for using Double Weapons (like the staff or a spear), and they also provide multiple attacks as well.

As for other characters being able to use Martial Arts like Monks can, that would kinda defeat the purpose of having Monks. Also, please note that there are at least two specific Martial Arts Styles which grant those Monk Attacks rules as well (though both are weapon kata/styles - it would be easy to develop another style that allows it as well). This means that a normal Fighter could learn to get those multiple attacks, they just have to put in more effort than then Monk does (which is proper, I think).

 

[TGryph]

Well, coming from someone who has not only bought and read through but actually PLAYEd Harp, I feel obliged to put my two cents in.

First, I am a long time (25+) years D&D player who was rapidly losing my love affair with the current edition, and was looking for something different. I tried several systems (about 5) with my current group before we settled on HARP.

First, all rules in one book..you gotta love that. And for those of you who say that it seems like there would be a lot of looking for the books for rules, you didn't when you first started (and quite possibly still do) playing D&D? HARP is a heckuva lot rules-lighter than D&D 3.5, while staying a LOT more open to a wide variety of player options.

The Magic system is a treat - you can actually DECIDE how powerful your spell needs to be and scale it to power...at the risk of a fizzle or even a Fumble. More excitement in spellcasting.

Combat is superior in my opinion...the open-ended rolls make even a high-level fighter think about his strategy and concern himself with every combat he enters...one lucky swing can seriously hurt or kill even the most doughty warrior.

And I have nothing but respect for the support...great live chat support with the designer himself, as well as very quick replies on the message boards.

Now some of my players are very set in their ways, and prefer the rules heavy, very High Fantasy (or as I call it Video Game Style) rpin'g of 3.5 D&D, which is fine if that is your preference. For me, I wanted something a little less restrictive, and a little more gritty without adding a ton of rules.

So, don't condemn the system on a quick read-through of the rules. Give the game a try..keep an open mind...and you may just be as pleasantly surprised as I was!

 

[Rasyr]

And I have nothing but respect for the support...great live chat support with the designer himself, as well as very quick replies on the message boards.

::whisper mode on::
Psssst..... TGryph........ That designer you are talking about? That would be me.....
::whisper mode off::

 

[Steel_Wind]

Interesting. I liked a lot of what I saw when I scanned through HARP, but I got this impression too -- and it's one of the reasons I haven't played it yet. I generally won't run a game if I have to regularly stop and look at the rules more than once or twice during a typical session. It's weird, but my tolerance for that has really gone down as I've gotten older.

Not a big fan of the Kingdoms of Kalamar DM screen I take it?

That thing has more flip charts than a hospital...