GURPS vs. Harp

[Rasyr]

What about making NPCs in HARP? I looked the rules, and it seemed like it might take a lot of effort ..

Depends on how detailed you want to get with the NPC.

For instance, if you want to make a generic Fighter, you just asign stats, level, and then max him out on a few skills, and total the bonuses. Once you know the system, this can go fairly quickly. For example, I can normally make a generic NPC in about 10-15 minutes.

For extremely detailed NPCs (like the big bad in a campaign), you will want to create him just as you would any other PC.

There is also an excel spreadsheet (which will output a NPC block for you) and an official chargen in beta test (go to the ICE forums, and just go to the software section and you can help beta test it).

- To resolve damage, you have to look up your result on a table, based on your weapon type. So long as you have all the sheets handily available, it's not that big of an issue, but the damage results often include "stun", so after a round or so combat, it seems feasible that many of the individuals participating would simply be stunned. In my experience, being stunned is quite boring. I'll have more insight into this problem once I actually run it. But, on paper it seems kind of flawed to me.

You do get to make a Resistance Roll against being Stunned....

question to Rasyr - Would it be feasible to alter the combat mechanic so that damage = OB - DB?

Let me see if I am getting your question straight.
Fighter A has OB of 40, Foe has DB of65. Fighter A rolls a 37 for a total of 77. Subtracting foes DB leaves 12.

So are you asking if using the above example, making it so that Foe takes 12 hits? I would say yes, IF you include modifications for the Attack Size (Tiny = -20; Small = -10; Medium = 0; Large = +10; Huge = +20). Doing this, if the attack was a Tiny one, Fighter A would have hit foe, but done no damage.

HARP itself also contains a Hit Point/Life Point variant combat system. Martial Law, and HARPer's Bazaar #1 also contain other variants of this as well. Additionally, I am currently working on two other combat variants (one to be released in about 2 weeks and the other, I just had the idea for this morning, so am still working out the details.

What this goes to show is that it IS very easy to customize HARP and to make it better fit your expectations and desires.

The guy who authored Martial Law came up with another combat variation as well. In his game, he asigned a different sized die to each attack size, and then rolls multiple dice (the number of dice rolled depending upon how well the character hits - i.e. +1 dice for every 10 points above DB, that the character rolls for an attack) to determine damage.

- Not as many monsters, not as many spells; again a good or a bad thing.

However, HARP does give you the tools to make your own. Monsters: A Field Guide has rules for creating monsters, and College of Magics has rules for making new spells.

 

[mmadsen]

No assumed level of magic items necessary to meet CR of monsters

If you ignore D&D's CRs, you get this "benefit" too. GURPS doesn't provide meaningful CRs. It provides point totals, which seem like they should work something like CRs, but they don't. And they implicitly assume not only that an opponent has as much useful magic as the party, but that his points are allocated in a similarly combat-efficient fashion.

 

[der_kluge]

What about making NPCs in HARP? I looked the rules, and it seemed like it might take a lot of effort ..

I've used Jonathon Dale's spreadsheet, and while it's a bit quirky, and takes some getting used to, it's pretty painless. You still have to have a fairly decent understanding of what it's trying to accomplish. In other words, you can't be an idiot and expect it to figure everything out for you. But I can generate an NPC in about 10-15 minutes with it, and have it be perfectly statted out and everything. It's really not any more or less complex than d20.

 

[der_kluge]

You do get to make a Resistance Roll against being Stunned....

Oh, I guess I overlooked that. Thanks

Let me see if I am getting your question straight.
Fighter A has OB of 40, Foe has DB of 65. Fighter A rolls a 37 for a total of 77. Subtracting foes DB leaves 12.

So are you asking if using the above example, making it so that Foe takes 12 hits? I would say yes, IF you include modifications for the Attack Size (Tiny = -20; Small = -10; Medium = 0; Large = +10; Huge = +20). Doing this, if the attack was a Tiny one, Fighter A would have hit foe, but done no damage.

Yea, I think that would be a bit easier, and I wouldn't have to look up the table that way. It would also create a bit more gritty AND cinematic game at the same time! (is that even possible!) It would make combat more lethal. Like, on the "slash criticals" chart, for example, if your result is 117, say (in the 116-119 range), instead of 38 hits, 5 rounds of stun, and the bleeding and agonizing portions of the description, instead he'd just take 117 hits, and likely be dead anyway. Of course, doing 117 hits to someone is pretty freakin' miraculous in and of itself. You'd have to: A) roll really, really well, B) have a sick weapon skill, or C) attack a defenseless grandma. If any are true, killing them outright makes sense to me!

Or, maybe somewhat less lethal, would be damage = (OB - DB) /2 So that your 117 points of damage would be 58 points of damage instead. That would make it less lethal.

 

[GuardianLurker]

HARP vs. RMSS

- To resolve damage, you have to look up your result on a table, based on your weapon type. So long as you have all the sheets handily available, it's not that big of an issue

Well, gosh-shucky-darn. I had real hopes for HARP (checking it out is/was on my to-do list), given that it was so closely based on RoleMaster Standard System. However, if it's still doing table lookup for combat, it's just not an option - combat will take way to flippin' long.

And yes, when I played RMSS, I made *sure* I had all the tables available - it still took too long. A simple 8-on-3 combat should not take over a half-hour per round.

 

[der_kluge]

Well, gosh-shucky-darn. I had real hopes for HARP (checking it out is/was on my to-do list), given that it was so closely based on RoleMaster Standard System. However, if it's still doing table lookup for combat, it's just not an option - combat will take way to flippin' long.

And yes, when I played RMSS, I made *sure* I had all the tables available - it still took too long. A simple 8-on-3 combat should not take over a half-hour per round.

Apparently you didn't just read my easy, handy-dandy combat workaround above.

 

[Rasyr]

Of course, doing 117 hits to someone is pretty freakin' miraculous in and of itself. You'd have to: A) roll really, really well, B) have a sick weapon skill, or C) attack a defenseless grandma.

or D) roll open-ended....

Or, maybe somewhat less lethal, would be damage = (OB - DB) /2 So that your 117 points of damage would be 58 points of damage instead. That would make it less lethal.

Lethality could actually be determined by the divisor. You could go with 1 hit for every ten point, or on for every five, etc...

 

[Rasyr]

Well, gosh-shucky-darn. I had real hopes for HARP (checking it out is/was on my to-do list), given that it was so closely based on RoleMaster Standard System. However, if it's still doing table lookup for combat, it's just not an option - combat will take way to flippin' long.

Still give it a look-see. The only time you look on the table during combat is IF you hit hard enough to damage. Determining whether or not that has happened does not require a table look-up at all.

And as die_kluge are discussing, and as I have mentioned above, there are several options available to allow you to in case you do not want to use the critical tables, and die_kluge just came up with another one....

 

[Greatwyrm]

I like HARP. It's well worth the price of the download.

GURPS is a good system and very flexible. Personally, I like HERO better.

In any case, all three of these are fairly generic systems. How well they portray the type of fantasy world you want depends entirely on how much work you do building the world. They are pretty much all crunch and no fluff.

 

[Conaill]

Sorry, can't give you too much of a comparison between GURPS and HARP, because I'm not familiar with the latter. I have played a lot of GURPS and d20 though, and i do prefer GURPS vastly better, for all the reasons you mentioned and then some. Congratulations on having seen the light!

Combat looks like it might be slower

Depends how you look at it. D&D combat rounds often take a *lot* more time than the typical GURPS combat round. GURPS IMHO is much more streamlined, but it does use a finer grained round system. I love the flexibility though! Many combat maneuvers for which d20 nonsensically requires a feat (such as parrying) are available to any character in GURPS.

In the end, this is something you'll have to try for yourself. Personally, I prefer GURPS combat.

Automatic failure on a skill check (3d6) role of 17 or 18

No big deal. An 18 is a chance of 1 in 218 - that's similar to rolling a "1" on a d20, and then rolling "1" or "2" on the confirmation roll. 17's are three times more likely (1-6 on confirmation roll), but if I remember correctly they only count as a regular failure if your skill is high enough.

May be too generic to best reflect the flavor of D&D style fantasy

Hey, if you want to play D&D, play D&D! I would rather say that D&D is too rigid to play anything but D&D-style fantasy. In particular, it is *much* harder to play a gritty, low-magic campaign in D&D. D&D is a pretty poor match if you're trying to fit 95% or more of fantasy literature.