Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tkinias" data-source="post: 1347956" data-attributes="member: 16530">There is some truth to that.&nbsp; I would qualify it by saying that I have actually played in Middle Earth using HârnMaster rules, and it works excellently -- much better than, for example, ICE's MERP or RoleMaster.&nbsp; I always had a problem with the fact that there was so much low-grade magic flying around that we never see in Tolkien.&nbsp; That's really neither here nor there, however.&nbsp; I never actually got it off the ground for a campaign (we decided that for us, a low-magic setting was more in line with our style of play), but a friend and I spent a lot of effort porting TSR-style magic to HârnMaster rules.&nbsp; There's absolutely no obstacle to using very high fantasy under these rules.&nbsp; Combat is much deadlier in HârnMaster rules than in d20 (at least for experienced characters), but add in powerful healing magic and a mage in every party and that becomes much less of an issue.Iron_Chef has hit on what is the biggest difference between HârnMaster and d20 (or, for that matter, any other system I've played):&nbsp; the feel of combat.&nbsp; Combat can be _very_ deadly, and you get a sense of exactly what is going on.&nbsp; That is, I don't just know I've been wounded, but I know that I have a bad bruise to my chest where my mail just _barely_ stopped your sword.&nbsp; I like that.&nbsp; For all that detail, however, it is shockingly easy to run combat, and it in can run faster than d20.&nbsp; All that is required is that the attacker and defender each make a roll, and we look at a four-by-four matrix to see what happens.&nbsp; That four-by-four matrix gets memorized about three rounds into your first fight.The big contrast with d20 is that there is basically one game mechanic (the skill roll) that you have to learn.&nbsp; Almost everything in the game involves that.&nbsp; There are no `feats' or anything else that change the way things work.&nbsp; Now, d20 when I first played it (back in the early 1980s, when it was just D&amp;D) was even simpler; the d20 of today is a much richer, much more complicated game, though.&nbsp; For the most part, this has been for the better, and there is a whole lot more to d20 today than there was twenty-plus years ago.&nbsp; However, the `complexity' argument that made HârnMaster seem so daunting in comparison to the D&amp;D of that era isn't really, IMHO, applicable today.&nbsp; We can play through a whole combat without referring to anything but two tables, and barring combat virtually never have to refer to the rules to see how things work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tkinias, post: 1347956, member: 16530"] There is some truth to that. I would qualify it by saying that I have actually played in Middle Earth using HârnMaster rules, and it works excellently -- much better than, for example, ICE's MERP or RoleMaster. I always had a problem with the fact that there was so much low-grade magic flying around that we never see in Tolkien. That's really neither here nor there, however. I never actually got it off the ground for a campaign (we decided that for us, a low-magic setting was more in line with our style of play), but a friend and I spent a lot of effort porting TSR-style magic to HârnMaster rules. There's absolutely no obstacle to using very high fantasy under these rules. Combat is much deadlier in HârnMaster rules than in d20 (at least for experienced characters), but add in powerful healing magic and a mage in every party and that becomes much less of an issue. Iron_Chef has hit on what is the biggest difference between HârnMaster and d20 (or, for that matter, any other system I've played): the feel of combat. Combat can be _very_ deadly, and you get a sense of exactly what is going on. That is, I don't just know I've been wounded, but I know that I have a bad bruise to my chest where my mail just _barely_ stopped your sword. I like that. For all that detail, however, it is shockingly easy to run combat, and it in can run faster than d20. All that is required is that the attacker and defender each make a roll, and we look at a four-by-four matrix to see what happens. That four-by-four matrix gets memorized about three rounds into your first fight. The big contrast with d20 is that there is basically one game mechanic (the skill roll) that you have to learn. Almost everything in the game involves that. There are no `feats' or anything else that change the way things work. Now, d20 when I first played it (back in the early 1980s, when it was just D&D) was even simpler; the d20 of today is a much richer, much more complicated game, though. For the most part, this has been for the better, and there is a whole lot more to d20 today than there was twenty-plus years ago. However, the `complexity' argument that made HârnMaster seem so daunting in comparison to the D&D of that era isn't really, IMHO, applicable today. We can play through a whole combat without referring to anything but two tables, and barring combat virtually never have to refer to the rules to see how things work. [/QUOTE]

Verification