Topic: HARM...?

[Right Wing Wacko]

After playing HARP and RM both, I have come to the conclusion that what I would really like would be a combination of systems. I like the way RM does certain things and I like the way HARP does some others. I (briefly) toyed with the idea of combining the parts of both games that I like, but quickly discovered I didn't have the time, patience, and complete understanding required for the task.

What aspects or mechanics of RM have any of you added to your HARP game (or vice versa)?
Why did you change it?
How did you change it?
How is it working out?

Thanks,
RWW

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

After playing HARP and RM both, I have come to the conclusion that what I would really like would be a combination of systems. I like the way RM does certain things and I like the way HARP does some others.

So what where the parts of each that you liked??   

[Right Wing Wacko]

HARP- the way spells are handled; separation of cultures and races; the way skills are handled; and the way talents and skills are bought.

RM- the AT's (more specifically, armor does not increase DB directly), the more varied crit tables, weapon adjustments due to armor used against( basically the entire combat system- I like the RM tables where there is Hit damage and sometimes a critical...), potential stats.

Thats all that stands out to me right now, and I suppose the main points. If I spend some time looking through the books, I could get more specific, but I don't think that is necessary.

Thanks for asking!
... anyone else?

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

RM- the AT's (more specifically, armor does not increase DB directly)

Have you checked out Combat Companion? It basically is somewhere between the 2. There are fewer Armor Ratings (which are determined by armor worn over the largest portion(s) of the body), with additional bits that increase the DB.

I personally think that when compared against HARP's armor system and RM's armor system, that it is the best of the three - allowing for RM style combat tables without allowing armor to be over powering in regards to DB.

[Right Wing Wacko]

No, I thought it was specifically for RM. How easy is it to integrate into HARP? Anyone know?
I will give it a look!
Thanks!

[Mungo]

HARP: Skill Mechanics, Spells, Talents, Stats
RM: Criticals, AT

And yes, I bought Combat Companion, but the AR system is too complicated for me to calculate during play, otherwise the attack tables would be more than fine if the RM criticals are taken and not the Combat Companion criticals (does this sentence make sense?).

BR
Juergen

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

No, I thought it was specifically for RM. How easy is it to integrate into HARP? Anyone know?
I will give it a look!
Thanks!

Basically, you just replace the HARP armor/combat system with the armor and combat system from CC. CC also contains a conversion of all of the RMC Monsters to the new armor system, so you could easily just use those ratings where appropriate.

And yes, I bought Combat Companion, but the AR system is too complicated for me to calculate during play

What are you calculating during play?? AR/DB should be determined outside of play in most all instances.

If you are talking about in regards to treasure items, there is a table in CC that breaks down the bonuses up to a +30 bonus based on the individual piece (it doesn't matter where the bonus comes from), and that could be easily expanded on an index card if needed. The AR ratings of monsters that wear armor is for full suits.

I am sorry, but I just really don't understand that comment (the comment about preferring the bigger crit tables, I can understand... hehe).

[Lazvon]

I own a couple copies of Combat Companion... but I tend to agree with what others have said... next time I run HARP, I'll probably use Arms Law for combat. I like AT, I like the critical tables, I like OE rolls.

[dutch206]

I would run RM Classic with Combat Companion, but use the critical tables from RMC.  (sorry, but I like the more detailed critical descriptions)

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I would run RM Classic with Combat Companion, but use the critical tables from RMC.  (sorry, but I like the more detailed critical descriptions)

Actually, what you are saying is that you like the greater number of critical results, as the CC crits are just as detailed (more so, if you count the new type of crit result), but there are fewer of them.

 

[GMLovlie]

I use mostly harp stuff, but I have added RM crit tables (including all the results, like must parry and no parry, which works sweetly), using it with HB#11, which works fine at the moment. In addition I?ve added skills: Silent Kill and Nerve Strikes (from MaC), I?m also considering adding long distance running and sprinting, but as of yet I?m unsure if I need it.

I do like the ATs in RM, but I find it easier with DB and my players seems to like that too, but introducing the ATs might not be a bad idea, although the mention of CC here intrigues me, I might have a look at that one too, after next payday.

[Right Wing Wacko]

I am hoping that the stand alone Cyradon game ends up being the mix I'm looking for. But that depends on the combat system...
Rasyr, what level will the Cyradon game give mechanics to?

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

The current plan will be for spell lists to be given to level 10, but there won't really be a "level limit" on anything simply because of the fact that there are no mechanics (other than spell lists) which have any sort of imposed level limits.

As for the combat system, it will likely be the RMX tables..

[Temujin]

Funny, I've always thought one of the nice approachs to Rolemaster was precisely the concept of spell lists.

[Mungo]

What are you calculating during play?? AR/DB should be determined outside of play in most all instances.

If you are talking about in regards to treasure items, there is a table in CC that breaks down the bonuses up to a +30 bonus based on the individual piece (it doesn't matter where the bonus comes from), and that could be easily expanded on an index card if needed. The AR ratings of monsters that wear armor is for full suits.

I am sorry, but I just really don't understand that comment (the comment about preferring the bigger crit tables, I can understand... hehe).

Hi,

An important part of combat is loot (at least when fighting powerful enemies). And currently deciding loot is a thing of seconds. But I imagine telling them you found an armor made of xxx. And then I start searching, and they start calculating. And comparing. Perhaps giving part of the armor to one character and another part to another character. For me this sounds like a nightmare.

Currently it is: "Leather, AT10 +10, 1 critical size less". Not even a second to generate. And not even a second to understand how it compares to existing gear in the party.

BR
Juergen

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

The problem with generating armor on the fly like that is a sentient monster (humanoid) would likely be using such treasure.

Currently it is: "Leather, AT10 +10, 1 critical size less". Not even a second to generate. And not even a second to understand how it compares to existing gear in the party.

The problem isn't that it would take too long. The problem is that you don't know the new system well enough to do it just as quickly.

instead of "Leather, AT 10, +10, 1 critical size less"

it would be

"Full Suit Rigid Leather, AR4, +10 (total DB of +22), shirt provides 1 critical size less"

Takes about just as long to generate, and slightly longer to detail.

Once you go to know the armor system, you would be generating magic items for it just as quickly. (Plus it would give you a lot more variety to select from in possible armors to give as treasure....) 

[Mungo]

The problem isn't that it would take too long. The problem is that you don't know the new system well enough to do it just as quickly.

You are of course right. But after 1,5 decades of AT my mind simply refuses to think something different. And this with 34, what a shame!

Perhaps I should form a lobbying group for conservative armour rules and call us the "AT dinosours"?

BR
Juergen

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

That got you a laugh point... hehe...   

Yes, the new armor rules are different, and they will take some getting used to. But that doesn't mean that they are bad or that there is something wrong with them.

The way you phrased your comments before, it sounded like you were saying that there was a problem with the rules themselves, not with your comfort level in using them.  Two very different things. 

[Mattiyaho]

I just bought HB #11 it may be the thing you are looking for since it is a conversion of the crit charts of one of the rolemasters.

[Right Wing Wacko]

I just bought HB #11 it may be the thing you are looking for since it is a conversion of the crit charts of one of the rolemasters.

Yes...yes... I know and have that HB.

It's just that I prefer the expanded and varied attack tables and crit tables from Arms Law.
I may just switch to RM completely... but the learning curve in my group is...well, lets just say the bar is pretty low.