hackmaster

[Chainsaw Mage]

I'm going to chime in here, commenting on what others have just said. I'm sure Hackmaster fans will attempt to lynch me for this, but...

I hate the game. It's not because it's built primarily on the old rules set--I prefer 3.5, but I played 1st/2nd edition for long enough that I can at least understand the appeal. It's that Hackmaster can't make up its mind what it wants to be.
...
Frankly, if you're looking for an old-school D&D feel, you'd do better finding some cheap 1st edition D&D books at Half-Price Books or on EBay. You can always add your own humor if you feel it's necessary, and it doesn't interrupt the flow of the game or the text as it does in Hackmaster.

[Stands up and cheers]

Well said. Hackmaster is hilarious in the Knights of the Dinner Table comics (of which I am an avid fan and collector). But what on earth was the point of making an actual Hackmaster game? If you want old school AD&D, play 1st/2nd edition. If you want humor, rent a movie.

 

[Dirt]

I'm going to chime in here, commenting on what others have just said. I'm sure Hackmaster fans will attempt to lynch me for this, but...

I hate the game. It's not because it's built primarily on the old rules set--I prefer 3.5, but I played 1st/2nd edition for long enough that I can at least understand the appeal. It's that Hackmaster can't make up its mind what it wants to be.

The humor built in? It's either too much or not enough. The idea that people shouldn't take a game deadly seriously really depends on A) the group, and B) the way the game itself is built. Hackmaster's jokes and goofiness are too ingrained for a serious game, but the game actually takes itself too seriously for a parody. It tries to be a serious, playable game with parody worked in, and that--to me--makes it fail on both counts. (For a perfect example, see the module "Quest for the Unknown." It's a serious module, except for the occasional goofy crack that totally breaks the mood and the flow. Too serious for one, too goofy for the other.)

Frankly, if you're looking for an old-school D&D feel, you'd do better finding some cheap 1st edition D&D books at Half-Price Books or on EBay. You can always add your own humor if you feel it's necessary, and it doesn't interrupt the flow of the game or the text as it does in Hackmaster.

I know people that would agree with you. I will say that, with the modules you are DEFINITELY going to get the silliness. According to Kenzer's agreement with WOTC, they HAVE to write in parody, otherwise they can't rewrite and reproduce old modules. In fact, they've had to go through several rewrites of some just to get the approval. Ugh.

The game mechanics are solid though. There are some really enjoyable additions...off the top of my head - critical hit chart, penetration damage (very deadly), spell mishap, alignment charts (complicated to keep track of, but it makes sense...a Lawful Evil character adventuring with Chaotic Good characters will be influenced by them and vice versa, which causes possible alignment shifts), etc.

The fun, cruchy bits far outweighs the negatives (of which, the most frequently cited are the difficulty of the rules, and the "parody" element of the game).

In the Hackmaster campaign that I'm currently running, it's a serious fantasy campaign.

 

[Dirt]

But what on earth was the point of making an actual Hackmaster game?

Hackmaster goes a lot further than 1st/2nd edition. If it were merely a repeat of existing material with parody added, I wouldn't bother. I have all of the core books...I wouldn't need any others. It goes much deeper than that.

Oh wait...was that a rhetorical question?

 

[tsadkiel]

While I don't own any Hackmaster books, I know people who do. I've read through the books, found some elements that interested me, and generally tried to like the game, but one word always gets in my way: gawd.

I really don't know why I find that spelling so grating, but I do. Whenever I see it, my attitude toward the game shifts from mild interest and general well-wishing to intense loathing. It's kept me well away from Hackmaster, and spoiled any amusement I may have gotten from "Knights of the Dinner Table."

 

[frankthedm]

The game is closer to what 3e should have been, rather than WOTC pulling the system's teeth and whoring it out to sell more PHBs.

 

[talinthas]

eh. 3e is much more newbie friendly than hackmaster.

 

[MerricB]

Two words that describe Hackmaster for me: Clumsy and Inelegant.

The core material derived from 1E/2E is good, but most of the bits added on (expanded initiative system, the awful, awful, awful skill system) just irritate me no end. There are good things about it, but not enough for me to really want to play a game of it.

Imagine the Player's Option system of 2E redesigned by monkeys on speed and you have the idea.

Cheers!

 

[Dirt]

Two words that describe Hackmaster for me: Clumsy and Inelegant.

The core material derived from 1E/2E is good, but most of the bits added on (expanded initiative system, the awful, awful, awful skill system) just irritate me no end. There are good things about it, but not enough for me to really want to play a game of it.

Imagine the Player's Option system of 2E redesigned by monkeys on speed and you have the idea.

Cheers!

I'm curious...what did you find to be awful about the skill system?

Expanded initiative system? There isn't much added to initiative, other than accounting for readied weapons and the difference in spellcasting initiatives...

:fathead scratches his enormous monkey noggin

 

[Dirt]

The game is closer to what 3e should have been, rather than WOTC pulling the system's teeth and whoring it out to sell more PHBs.

I do admit, WOTC made a lot of changes. I think the 3E game mechanics are pretty solid though. Believe, it was MUCH better than what was originally delivered to the playtesters. I was so discouraged with the original game mechanics that I gave up playtesting the game. In retrospect, I probably should have stuck with it because they obviously listened to the playtesters gripes...so much so that I saw a significant change (almost a complete re-write) when it was released.

This is probably another topic though...

 

[Dirt]

eh. 3e is much more newbie friendly than hackmaster.

I'll definitely agree with that. If you're going for newbie friendly, you should reconsider on Hackmaster. If you're already familiar with 1st/2nd edition rules though, you're already familiar with the core mechanics.