HARP vs D&D

[Staffan]

Its not true, it IS "rolemaster lite" for all intents and purposes, in a much closer way even than say D&D 3.0 is the same game as D&D 2.0. There are differences, but it really is the same game.

I wouldn't call it "Rolemaster Lite". It's more along the lines of a rules-light (well, rules-medium) game made by someone who thinks Rolemaster is pretty neat, and thus it shares certain sensibilities with RM.

 

[Rasyr]

Rasyr, believe me or not I don't really bear any ill-will toward HARP, and if this thread and my posts on it help you sell HARP then more power to you, as long as its because people are actually informed on what HARP is and have heard both the "goods" and "bads" of it, so they can make an intelligent decision.

Please note that this applies to d20 games as well. I think that D&D is a pretty good system, but I personally find it a lot less flexible than I like. Nothing bad against d20/D&D, just my own personal tastes on the matter.

Many of my comments on this thread have diverged to not be about HARP at all, but about "fantasy heartbreakers" as a theme or "D20-hate" as an issue. Those that are directly critical of HARP (for example, where I criticize the game system) are critical of actual things in the book; which unless you're blind enough to believe HARP can be all things to all people, or insane enough to believe HARP is flawless, you should concede are all legitimate critiques.

Please read my above posts (in more than one) where I say that HARP is not perfect. I have also never tried to claim it was. Now what I will say is that actual game play with HARP has an entirely different feel than D&D does. Not better, not worse, just different, and that in itself could be a reason for somebody to try HARP.

As for whether or not a critique is legitimate, that is an entirely seperate issue and one that I will take on a case-by-case basis. Every person's critique is colored by their own biases and pre-conceptions. That is something that has to be taken into consideration.

Finally some of my posts here were about business practices. Some were sound business advice in general (ie. about how to market based on promoting your product's strengths, not trying to argue that the game that the vast majority of gamers play and like is "bad fun"), but a couple were specific to actual business practices your company has participated in (namely the anti-d20 promotion). The former should not nescessarily be taken to mean I think you're company is engaged in those practices; the later obviously does apply directly to you though.

anti-d20 promotion? You referring to the trade-in offer? Personally, I do not see that as anti-d20 in any manner. I see it as a chance to offer folks something new to try something new (at a discount) in exchange for something they may not have liked or wanted (for whatever reason) after they had acquired it.

Of course, with d20 being the largest market share, it is aimed at d20. That is only common sense, and has nothing to do with any perceived value of d20 in and of itself.

I have to admit I'm currently a political refugee from RPGnet, but obviously I'm on the pro-d20 side of things (the cause of my aforementioned exile, more or less).

In other words, rpg.net banned you for a while.
Nisarg, there is a difference between being pro-d20 and being somthing of (sorry, but cannot think of a better word) a zealot.

There is a tremendous myth among the d20-hating crowd that D20 players only play D20 because they "don't know any better", ie. that they've never played other systems, and don't want to give the other systems a shot. Ignoring how patently ludicrous this is for a moment, this line of thought is explicatory of a lot of the non-d20 mentality out there today; this idea leads the non-d20 people to be convinced that if they could just get the D20 fans to play another system (any system!) the D20 fans would immediately "realize" how bad their old fun was and how much better this new system is and abandon d20 forever.

I am sorry, but this thread seems to be the wrong place to bring this up. Nobody on this thread has espoused any such theory, nor have I ever espoused such.

Note that there are of course many people who mainly play a non-d20 game, but are willing to play d20 stuff, and bear it no ill will. These are not the people I'm talking about, so if you are one of those people, please don't get offended. I'm only talking about the more fanatical kind of D20-haters, the likes of which you might occasionally see at a FLGS trying to convince some kid that Vampire is much better than 3.0, or on RPG.net throwing steaming piles of abuse at people who dare to call them on the absurdity of their assumptions.

However, you are talking about it in this thread, which has shown none of the attitudes which you expressed. And before you get ready to do another rant, think first about the equally vocal group who espouse that d20 is the "only" system worth playing. They are just as bad as the group you are deriding in the bits that I snipped.

Personally, I feel that this thread is not the place to be venting on those topics as nobody has shown those attitudes you were referring to, at least not here on this thread. All this kind of post does is what rpg.net folks refer to as "thread-crapping", purposely taking it off-topic to rant about something not really related to the topic of the thread.

 

[Piratecat]

I'm not entirely comfortable with the attitudes in this thread. Keep it friendly, folks; saying something insulting with a smiley face attached is still usually perceived as an insult, even if you didn't mean it that way.

 

[buzz]

Grim Tales isn't so much a game as a game construction kit.

IMHO, the best "generic" games are. But GT isn't FUDGE or anything. I think it's relying somewhat on the (reasonable) assumpiton that the reader probably owns lots of d20 material that they can mine. I believe that the various supplements BadAxe intends to publish will also provide this kind of info.

My main complain with d20 Modern is the lack of any sort of support for campaigns not set in the current day.

Hence the name. At least WotC wasn't misleading anyone. Ergo, I don't if one can really complain about this, though one can certainly *want* this.

If you want to do anything with d20M other than run a current day adventure you need to buy extra stuff (and stuff that WotC doesn't provide).

Well, there's a LOT of 'ported D&D content in d20M. With that and the Urban Arcana setting, you'd have most everytyhing you need to run d20M for medieval fantasy.

ILoJ came out before d20 Modern (or soon after). Its not really a multi-genre game anyway.

It came out well after d20M. I mention it, though, because it's basically S&S fantasy that uses the d20M ruleset.

 

[buzz]

Depends on what you like.

"Like" denotes preference. These are issues of preference, not problems.

Inflating HP: No need to piont out the problem with this because it's obvious.
Uber Magic: Rasing the Dead is easy, need I say more?
Classes: HPF classes won't work for LPF most of the time.

Nothing you point out here are problems. They're preferences.

If you're making a point about other companies' inability to adapt d20 (or any system) to your liking for their product's chosen genre/setting, your issue is with those companies, not with d20 (or whatever system).

 

[Kaleon Moonshae]

Actually, what it appears that you are saying is that you do not like any system which may be competition for D&D. You have made 14 (out of the 24 total that you have) posts on this thread alone, all of them attacking HARP either directly or indirectly.

I have to say I agree with this considering one of his other posts (seems to be the majority of his posts) was in the d6 thread bashing it.

 

[Kaleon Moonshae]

I'm still not understanding where people get off making blanket, asinine attributions like this. Has there been a mass exodus from RPG.net lately?

The market research WotC did when they were preparing for the release of 3e showed that people who are happy with D&D tend to stick with it. They do try other RPGs, but they tend to try less than those people who are not happy with D&D, instead spending their gaming dollars on D&D product.

This, IME, shows a general tendency (which other aspect of the study also mention): gamers, after a period of experimentation, tend to settle on systems they enjoy, and are often reluctant to try new systems simply because learning any new system (particularly mechanics-heavy ones) involves a not-insignificant investent of time, money, and resources. I haven't met many gamers who think d20 is inherretly superior, but I have met many who are happy with it and will opt to stick with it over learning yet another system. The ones I've met that are particularly staunch about this, however, have been feew and far between.

IME, I tend to find the kind of attitude you and AIM are describing FAR more prevalent among the D&D/d20-hating crowd. I.e., "the majority feel superior towards D&D/d20 products and are unwilling to give these games a fair shot." Just look at how this discussion of HARP has brought people who feel the need to complain about d20 out of the woodwork. Heck, just try having a discussion about d20 over at RPG.net or The Forge.

Conversely, have a discussion about non-d20 systems here at ENWorld, and you usually have a very lively, friendly discussion (barring this one, maybe).

And baring the d6 threads, and the vampire requime thread. Sorry, IME it's the same on either side of the market. Most of my friends have dozens of different systems and love all of them. This idea that gamers stick with one system has never panned out till d20 came along. Most players of other system that I know play multiple systems for different feels, go ahead and ask me how many I know personally well enough to gm. D20 is a great system, and I have yet to *bash* it but I might start because I feel that is the onyl thing that people listen to. D20 is a bit stifleing to people who like different feels to games, because every d20 game feels like every other d20 game (that was one of the selling points, the ease of compatibility). Even trinity (the best ST line in my opinion) is going d20 because it couldn't survive on its own and the monster that is d20 ate it up. Seventh Seas went d20 and failed, because most of the people who originally liked it liked the d10 system (as well as Lo5r). For the record I have never hung out on rpgnet because they are *all* rabid it seems. Here at least, usually, as long as you talk about d20 you are pretty safe and don't get slammed purely on your taste of games. Saying that, however, you do tend to get bashed in the general rpg threads if you like some other system and think it has merits *in addition* to d20. You say that it is some sign of overall behavior that you get people *coming out of the woodwork* in this thread... well this thread is about the merits of HARP and/or d20 so you can expect it to be a little bit anti both ways. Also, a majority of d20 fanatics are not going to read this thread while most people who have an interest in HARP are, and a lot (not all by any means, I for one love d20 and haven't even decided to play HARP yet) of the people who like HARP have issues with d20, just like the people who play any game.

 

[Garlak]

Aaron2, I'm saying I don't think it does it well.it does not do it well.
Inflating HP and raise dead spell are not my idea of Low power fantasy.

Who said anything about a mistake? I sure as hell did not.
I'm saying that some companies use it badly. They use D20 because it sells. Numbers don't mean quality in this industry anymore then it does in the music industry. Some are good, some are bad. Deal with it.

Buzz, I know what I wrote and I know what it means.
So please stop responding to me like I'm an idiot who does not know.
I see those things as problems, you might think they are great.
I don't care what you think because I'm not you.

I'm not saying that D20's a bad system, I'm saying it does not fit my style.
It's my post, so it contains my opinion. Don't like them, don't read them.

 

[Nisarg]

I have to say I agree with this considering one of his other posts (seems to be the majority of his posts) was in the d6 thread bashing it.

There is no real system that could give D20 competition (for 1st place, that is), not any existing system. So to say that I dislike any system that could do so is pretty moot.

There are plenty of systems I do like. I happen to dislike d6, and especially people who try to argue that D6 does Star Wars evcen remotely well.
I don't "dislike" it because its any kind of competition to D20, in fact up until recently it was a dead system, and if it failed once its pretty likely to do so again.
At least with HARP they are being "inspired by" (would you at least agree with that, Tim?) Rolemaster, without just re-releasing rolemaster. As for "dislike", I can't even say I dislike HARP; I'm neutral on it, I would likely never play it, and I can see some issues with the system (but ALL systems have issues). I just don't think you can honestly posit a "HARP vs. D&D" scenario, any more than a "D6 is the future" scenario. Both of these are ludicrous possibilities.

Nisarg

 

[buzz]

Buzz, I know what I wrote and I know what it means.
So please stop responding to me like I'm an idiot who does not know.

I'm not sure what merited this kind of response. I'm also not sure where "stop responding" fits in, as I've only responded to you once, prior to this.

I see those things as problems, you might think they are great...

I'm not saying that D20's a bad system, I'm saying it does not fit my style.
It's my post, so it contains my opinion. Don't like them, don't read them.

No one is saying that you can't post your opinion. All I'm pointing out is that there's a difference between saying "system X has obvious problems" and "system X does not fit my style." Hit points, high magic, and classes are not "obvious problems." They are simply design choices.

I don't care what you think because I'm not you.
...
Don't like them, don't read them.

I don't understand. You're posting in a public forum, but you don't want anyone to respond to your posts?