Topic: HARP vs RMFRP

[Salem]

Hi All,

I used to play rpg's a long time ago and I'm thinking of jumping back in and running a campaign with some friends.  My question is this. What is the difference between HARP and RMFRP?  I see some similarities between the two, but I'm curious what some experienced players think... why should I choose HARP over RMFRP or vice versa?

Thoughts??

[Salem]

Hi All,

I used to play rpg's a long time ago and I'm thinking of jumping back in and running a campaign with some friends.  My question is this. What is the difference between RMFRP and HARP?  I see some similarities between the two, but I'm curious what some experienced players think... why should I choose RMFRP over HARP or vice versa?

I posted this same query to the HARP forum as well.  I figured I should be fair.

Thoughts??

[Arioch]

The two systems have some similarities but they're very different.
RMFRP is far more complex than HARP, expecially if you use all the options, if you love detail choose RMFRP, if you prefer a more light-hearted type of game, then HARP would be your choice.

[DavidKlecker]

In my eyes, Harp is a ingenious success at taking a very complex system (RMFRP) and converting into a more accessible and easy to learn and game system. A system that harkens more to D&D or MERP but still keeps the best of Rolemaster. Combat is far leaner and the spell system in my opinion is vastly superior. The experience point system I found rather lackluster as I did with the beasts, treasure and equipment but then Creatures and Monsters, Treasure Companion and Everything and Ten Foot Pole is perfect in filling in those gaps (at least for me).

[smug]

As the resident RMFRP-hater, I should point out that there's always RMC/RM2, as well. Guaranteed to make you happy or none of your money back, guaranteed.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I merged the two topics because double posting is not something to be encouraged

[Setorn]

While I do not hate any of ICE’s systems, I prefer RMC.  That said, HARP is like a cousin to the family of RM.  It is simpler from what I can deduce.  RMC and HARP have introduction material.  For RMC it is Rolemaster Express (RMX) and can be purchased as one book ready to play.  RMX is very reasonably priced.  From RMX you can slow expand to RMC.  HARP has HARP lite, which I believe is free.  You can down load it from somewhere on the website here.  HARP lite is much like RMX is for RMC. 

RMFRP the main difference between it and RMC is complexity and the skill system. 

[Salem]

Thanks for the help!  I'm most likely going to purchase some of the core books in pdf format today for Rolemaster.  One further question.  If the two systems are similar, is it fairly intuitive to convert HARP stuff to Rolemaster?

[Marc R]

I'd say that's a matter of how complex a conversion. . .if you know both systems well, you'd likely be able to do complex conversions on the fly. . .if you knew one system well, you could likely do simple conversions on the fly. .that's true of any two systems though.

There are major advantages in that the two systems are so similar, but you also get "False equalities" that can catch you up, because they are similar. . .

Then again, most mistakes you would make would usually be relatively minor. (Or obvious after using it for just a bit.)

[pastaav]

HARP is my choice for one shoots adventures since the character creation is streamlined for speed and creating low level characters that are compentent.
RMFRP is my choice for long campaigns since it handle the epic scale better. The downside with this is that RMFRP characters need to be higher level before they actually reach the wanted archtype.

[buddha]

HARP is my choice for one shoots adventures since the character creation is streamlined for speed and creating low level characters that are competent.

It sure works out great for low level character. The campaign I GM I started them out at level 0 and they are now around level 10. In HARP characters advance a lot faster, so level 3-4 character can pack a good punch. And even at level 1 they are not hopeless.

RMFRP is my choice for long campaigns since it handle the epic scale better. The downside with this is that RMFRP characters need to be higher level before they actually reach the wanted archtype.

I agree. The problem is that at low level RM characters are weak. 10-15 years ago when I played RM2 on a regular basis a normal campaign started with characters around 6th, 7th level.

Conversion between the to are easily enough. If you prepare monsters and encounters before playing it should be no problem at all, and on the fly conversions can be done accurately enough with good knowledge of just the one system you play as long as you have familiarized yourself with the other system.

I have yet to try to convert player characters, but as I feel I'm getting closer to  a more epic level of play I am considering changing to a variety of RM. Probably RMC since it's the closest to good old RM2 which was my main RPG during my most active period as a player end GM.

As with most RPGs I have played, GMed or just read fighters tend to fall loose to spell users in the long run, but there is always the option of letting your fighters learn some magic when they feel they have mastered the art of banging people on the noggin'

[jasonbrisbane]

It might be an idea to remember that the biggest difference (IMHO) is the Magic system.

RM has spell realms,(and profession base lists), lists and individual spells for each level.
HARP has spheres  and spells. The spells are scalable, which IMO replace the Spell mastery skill in a much neater system.
(I never could get the hang of Spell mastery in RM...)

If you are going to be swapping between systems then this will be the biggest hurdle for the players...