Hackmaster. Please explain.

[Spell]

Sure, but I already own a generic fantasy RPG with D&D/d20. Also, the only people I know who want to play HM are KODT fans who would complain if we didn't play by the full rules. So far, prepping that kind of game has seemed way too much work.

I see. Then you're probably right: it's too much work, especially if you have other campaigns going on. The differences between HM (or AD&D) and the new D&D would require some time to digest on their own. Plus you have the new rules...

Still, if your players want to play HM "as is", why don't they help you with that? One of them could take up the role of GM, learn the system and run a short adventure or a mini-campaign. It would be easier for him, maybe, because he would be really motivated and he wouldn't have to worry about other campaigns work. And it would give you some rest while he's running his one-shot.

You can decide to play a serious game, or a parody game, in the literal spirit of hackmaster and the comics. I think you will have a winner either way.

I hope my posts didn't come over that way. If they did, I apologize. I was just giving you my personal impression of HM, which admittedly isn't too great.

No, I wasn't referring to you.
Anyway, I don't think that HM is for everybody, in the same way that any game is not for anybody. I like HM and GURPS, but I don't have a high opinion of the d20 system. Other people might despise what I like and love the d20 system... I think it really depends on your gaming tastes, your group, your experiences, what are you looking for in a game, and a bunch of other things.
I accept and enjoy difference in tastes, as long as those differences don't keep us from having a friendly discussion like the one we're having here!

 

[drakhe]

Hackmaster in reverse

I know nothing about Hackmaster but it intrigues me.

From what I can gather, it's a spoof of 1st Edition AD&D. What I want to know, however, is:

1) Are there people who actually play this game in earnist (ie. not as a tongue-in-cheek experience but as a kind of "the D&D 3E that was meant to be")?

2) Do the "re-makes" of the classic 1E modules stay true to the original material or do they "update" them in a "Return to the . . ." type of way (ie. taking place 20 years later or some such)? Do they add new material to these adventures?

3) Is there anybody out there who has purchased all 10 (?), A-Z, monster books?

3) yes I bought them all! Because I collect the series, because they are just great fun (and they do add one very interesting aspect: each entry has a YIELD box that details what parts are usable and for what!)

2) Can't realy say, don't have a basis for comparison (either not read or not in posesion of original)

1) I fear we (the people in my gaming circle who would aver even concider playing hackmaster) are to much of KotDT fans (Knights of the DinnerTable, the roleplaying related comic. The group in that comic plays hackmaster 3d edition, the published one is 4ed ) so we would always end up playing KOtDT style... (heavy tongue in cheeck)

 

[MerricB]

As somebody else has already pointed out, HackMaster is much more modular than the d20 system. If you don't like, or don't understand, a rule, you can simply play without it.

Whenever I see people praising the "modular" aspect of any RPG, I wonder if they know what they're praising.

You could say that "Weapon Specialisation" was modular in AD&D... however it changes the power of the fighter in a significant way.

You could say that the Non-Weapon Proficiency system in AD&D was modular, but that is just because it had no effect on game play at all - it didn't actually do anything useful!

I consider a system modular when it benefits all character types equally.

The Flaws system in Hackmaster is modular, for instance.

Cheers!

 

[Breakdaddy]

I think we all get the message that you are a 3(.5?)e dedicant(me own word, weeeee!), merricb. I can appreciate that, but also thoroughly enjoy a nice game of Hackmaster. We play it straight and seriously, and have a blast. Its just as much fun as our 3.5e game, though I get a chance to play only rarely. However,
you probably should play the game a few times before you pass blanket judgement on the system. Just my 2 CP.

 

[MerricB]

Where have I made a blanket judgement of the system?

I dislike the term "modular" being applied to systems that affect the balance of characters and the game depending on whether they're used or not. That has nothing to do with Hackmaster.

I think the Hackopedia in 8 volumes was a very, very, very bad idea. As far as bad ideas go, it's probably one of the top bad ideas in the history of gaming.

I don't like the skill system. There are some good ideas in there, and before 3E I might have enjoyed it, but I now find it needlessly complex, and the thing that stands most in the way of me considering Hackmaster a "serious" game. I think the skill system works wonderfully well for Hackmaster The Parody, but for a serious system? Yuk!

I do think there are lots of good things about the game, but I'm quite happy with my 3.5E books, thank you very much.

 

[dead]

Does HM still use AC that gets better the lower it is? In other words, AC -10 is a good AC.

I guess I'm asking: Does it still use THACO or Combat Matricies like in 1E and 2E?

 

[Breakdaddy]

I think the Hackopedia in 8 volumes was a very, very, very bad idea. As far as bad ideas go, it's probably one of the top bad ideas in the history of gaming.

As you said yourself, they have remedied this with a 1 volume hacklopedia that encompasses many of the most sought after baddies in the game. Top bad ideas in gaming history? maybe. But you're harping about a non issue at this point.

 

[Olive]

I've always liked the RobinLoft adventure. I read through it, and couldn't believe how true it felt to old... I6, was it? something like that. It was great. I ran my 3E group through it, and they all agreed it was an amazing adventure (Most of these are fairly new players, and a couple old timers who never did ravenloft).

Then a few months back I dug my old RavenLoft adventure out, and read it, and couldn't believe how much it sucked, in comparison to RobinLoft. Sure, some of the names are a bit corny... But the adventure itself is *very* sound, and very good.

I think it was I7...

Anyway, that's a big call for a mod considered a classic like the original ravenloft. I've seen a lot of people say that the HM mods are fantastic, and that they take the good bits of the old versions and bring them to life in a way that 1e mods didn't.

Would they be worth pickign up for soemone who doesn't play HM? For maps, npcs and the like?

 

[Krieg]

I think it was I7...

The first Ravenloft was in fact I6.

I7 was Baltron's Beacon.

Ravenloft II: House on Gryphon Hill was I10

 

[Kormydigar]

I thoroughly (as a GM) dislike the whole "players are the enemy" attitude behind this.

The whole presentation is done in a comedic fashion. In addition to being in the spirit of the comics, it is in the spirit of 1st ed. D&D. Check out the 1st ed. DMG if you have not seen it. The preface by Gygax states that the DMG is for the eyes of the DM alone and those players possessing it are somewhat less than worthy of an honorable death! This was serious business. This tome contains rules items which are not described in the PHB, like the spell explanations. These rules further defined facts about spells contained in the PHB but had to be discovered by players through trial and error. Some players are going to try and read every rulebook, module, supplement, ect, that they can get thier hands on, no matter what edition you are playing, and some GM's and players will always view the game as adversarial, thats how it goes.