Topic: What problems are there with the "Hack and Slash" combat tables?

[dagorhir]

So, based upon Nicholas' OFFICIAL RULING (and he's the boss on this call  )
Casting an Elemental Attack Spell is successful unless the spell is fumbled (0-10), but hitting the target needs you to beat the defense.


Casting a Utility Spell requires a 70+ casting roll.  With that it is cast.


Casting an Attack Spell requires a 10+ casting roll in order for the spell to be cast.  Success requires a failed resistance.


I personally don't like that as every spellcasting attempt should have an equal chance of failure or dramatic success (IMO), but those are the rules as written.

Almost, according to the Maneuver table on page 73 and the Fumbles section on  page 77, the fumble range of 01 - 05 in all cases.

[Thom @ ICE]

Thank you, corrected my post so as not to confuse people.
Therefore a net result of 6 could yield a fireball being cast - but likely wouldn't hit anyone.


An 11 would allow casting of any spell other than a utility, though probably they would not be successful against their target (attack) or would they hit the target (elemental attack) - but they would still result in other damage.


A 71 is required to make light..... 

[dagorhir]

71 is an adjusted roll including skill bonus and penalties if any. Most characters should be able to succeed this on a roll of 30 or more on the dice, which isn't that bad.

[Thom @ ICE]

They are all adjusted rolls - with the 5% fumble being a constant.


Assume that the casters each have 6 ranks and +10 for stats for +40 overall in their spells.


The caster casting an Elemental Attack spell has a 5% chance of fumble, otherwise their spell works - though it may not hit the target, but it can still deliver collateral damage.


The caster casting an Attack spell has a 5% chance of fumble, otherwise their spell works - though it may not get through the target's defense and is unlikely to deliver any damage if resisted.


The caster casting a Utility spell has a 30% chance of failure and 5% chance of fumble, otherwise their spell works.


Elemental Attack spells have it best. Why not use the attack roll as a casting roll?  If the adjusted spellcasting roll fails to exceed 70, then it fails.  If it exceeds 70, then it becomes the attack roll or sets the RR target....  If 70 is too high, then lower it to 10 and treat it similar to Attack Spells. I personally like the way I have always done it, which yields a chance for a Double, Double x2 or Triple result for a great spell casting roll.

[Bruce]

I personally don't like that as every spellcasting attempt should have an equal chance of failure or dramatic success (IMO), but those are the rules as written.

I agree Thom, which is why the confusion on my end. I can understand the actual chance of success and failure based on if an elemental attack spell hits or not. But, even if an area affect elemental attack spell misses it's intended target isn't there still a chance it can cause some damage if it hits nearby? It still does not seem fair to me. The whole scaling spells negative modifier still makes utility spells that much less effective and less attractive.  I am probably going to have to come up with some kind of house rule on this.

I am also a little confused about something else. Maybe I am remembering a rule in one of the Rolemaster editions, but aren't there rules in HARP about what part of your DB is applied to missile and/or elemental attacks? I didn't think the entire DB bonus is used, but I can't seem to find that info in the HARP core book.

Bruce

[Thom @ ICE]

Scaling negative modifier makes sense if you consider that the scaled version is not the standard version of the spell.  Of course, if you consider scaling just another spell that happens to cost more PP and has different results, it doesn't help.


I personally would prefer to go with a multiplier adjustment against total PP expended.  Fast casting would make the multiplier increase and extended casting (rituals) would reduce the multiplier

[Thom @ ICE]

As for what part of DB counts or doesn't count, I don't think it's listed in there, but I always used logic.

[Pat]

I am also a little confused about something else. Maybe I am remembering a rule in one of the Rolemaster editions, but aren't there rules in HARP about what part of your DB is applied to missile and/or elemental attacks? I didn't think the entire DB bonus is used, but I can't seem to find that info in the HARP core book.

Bruce

My understanding was that it was only shields that differed. If a bolt is cast then shield DB is included but if it's a ball then shield DB is excluded.

[Bruce]

I am also a little confused about something else. Maybe I am remembering a rule in one of the Rolemaster editions, but aren't there rules in HARP about what part of your DB is applied to missile and/or elemental attacks? I didn't think the entire DB bonus is used, but I can't seem to find that info in the HARP core book.

Bruce

My understanding was that it was only shields that differed. If a bolt is cast then shield DB is included but if it's a ball then shield DB is excluded.

I agree with that, but I couldn't find it anywhere in the rules. Taking Thom's statement that he doesn't think it is listed in there, I will have to assume it isn't. So that is going to have to be another house rule.
FYI, I have a document online in my dropbox called house rules that all my players have access to, like all of my handouts. This way I save on ink and paper and the players always have a copy if needed.

Bruce

[Thom @ ICE]

I'll do a scan through to see if I find it. It's not a rule I have regularly referred to, but it may be there.

[Bruce]

I discovered a rule in the HARP core book that somewhat makes a difference: When rolling a fumble for spells you get a modifier based in the spell type.
The modifiers are: Elemental Spells = +20, Attack Spells +10, Utility spells +0.
Elemental spells include the elemental attack spells.This is on pg 77 of the latest release of HARP.

Bruce

[Yapadekoi]

Just to add the opinion of my player,
long ago they compared Elemental bolt to another ranged attack and not to other spell.
In this case the problem is even more flagrant.

With a bow
1 medium attack every other turn, no penalty and maybe point blank bonus.

With a bolt:
1 medium attack every other turn, with a (-20) penalty because of scale AND you have the PP cost of 9.
You could attack every turn but with (-40) and +10 fumble, difficult to hit a good opponent with (-40).

Sad but Bow win due to the PP cost...
Considering the PP cost, you could at least expect an equal ratio for both attack.

Considering that with magic you can keep one hand free and have more versatility the malus is not too much BUT
For this cost of PP you can make 2 major healing ! (and heal completely the damage done by a bad bolt).
Or 2 "sleep" spell which in some situation are more lethal.
a caster is more efficient with a bow and a huge bladeturn spell.


We love hack & slash and use it since we start playing HARP (5-6 years ago maybe can't be sure).
We use the "old" version with the break 150 rule of harper bazaar N°14.
Otherwise increasing elemental attack don't make sense.

My player are very fond of this hack&slash, they liked it since the first day and I think it's one of the reason they keep like harp.
Of course we encounter the same "bug" as every body like this one and the then the Swaschbuckler/monk extra high DB character and then the harper problem with extra high impossible to resist sleep spell.
We outweigh them without breaking the system with little houserule.
It was just sad that we found no clue on those problem in "official" houserule.

I don't think that 70 for utility spell is lame because for most of those spell it is possible to wait the maximum time to gain  +30 soo we found it balanced.

Well just to add an opinion of player who are mostly satisfied of the current system overall.
We found everything snaps smoothly overall.

For people who are interested we used those solution:
For elemental spell:
I allow player to totally avoid the scaling malus on elemental spell if they wish to cast it "unleashed".
 but the fumble range is increase by 1 for every pp scale.
Make them think twice and balance the risk.

For swashbuckler:
we used the armor reducing damage like in martial law.
Worked fine, with just the armor reduction not the increase.