Topic: HARP D20-Fied Revisited

[SamwiseSeven]

In working for my HARP D20-Fied game I'm going to be running in November, I just felt I should bring this up again.

I'm still a little confounded that it seems that most of the ICE crowd isn't a fan of dividing a D100 by 5, and using either a D20, or 2D10 instead.  The other Tim (Rasyr) did most of the work for you with the free HARP D20-Fied download.  The only thing not converted is the spell descriptions, but once you type up (or highlight and copy from a PDF) and put the spells on your character sheet, and divide by 5, then you never have to do it again.  Most characters don't have that many spells anyway, so it isn't a lot of work.

In hindsight, I wish HARP would have been originally made as a 2D10 + Skill vs difficulty system, but that is what House Rules and Optional Rules are for. 

To remind everyone, the HARP D20-Fied stuff can be found here:

http://www.harphq.com/webextras.htm

I just don't see the big deal about being firm on using a D100...  But I guess that is just me.  hehe.

[GoblynByte]

In working for my HARP D20-Fied game I'm going to be running in November, I just felt I should bring this up again.

I'm still a little confounded that it seems that most of the ICE crowd isn't a fan of dividing a D100 by 5, and using either a D20, or 2D10 instead.  The other Tim (Rasyr) did most of the work for you with the free HARP D20-Fied download.  The only thing not converted is the spell descriptions, but once you type up (or highlight and copy from a PDF) and put the spells on your character sheet, and divide by 5, then you never have to do it again.  Most characters don't have that many spells anyway, so it isn't a lot of work.

In hindsight, I wish HARP would have been originally made as a 2D10 + Skill vs difficulty system, but that is what House Rules and Optional Rules are for.  

To remind everyone, the HARP D20-Fied stuff can be found here:

http://www.harphq.com/webextras.htm

I just don't see the big deal about being firm on using a D100...  But I guess that is just me.  hehe.

It's all just probabilities.  Some people just reject certain ideas simply based on their association with "lesser" systems.  There is very little mechanical (or even objective) reasoning behind the lack of desire to use a d20.

Well, there is a slight mechanical issue with using 2d10 instead of a d20 (the bell curve) but I think that's a minor issue.

A while back I had streamlined the maneuver chart and crit charts with the goal in mind of using HARP for a local demo (never go to do the demo, though), but never got to converting spells and such.

[Thom @ ICE]

2d10 has no direct correlation to d100. The probabilities are completely different and I would suggest that using 2d10 would not be HARP at all because the charts were developed based upon a flat probability chart.

For 1d20 vs 1d100 OE, there are mechanics that use finer adjustments than multiples of 5. If you want to lose that detail to play the d20 version that's fine, but the d100 is a big part of why I like HARP and I would even suggest that the charts using breaks every 5 is a lost opprtunity - though I do understand the work involved in going to separate results for every 1, 2 or 3 results.

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

2d10 would give a significantly different experience than d20 because of the bell curve. using a d20 would  make the math simpler at the expense of some fine resolution in results.

Best wishes,
Nicholas

[Karizma]

I can only speak for myself.  I've considered going d20 HARP, but each time I look at it, I am averted.  There are two completely arbitrary, nonsensical reasons for me sticking with d100.

1)  Coming from Rolemaster, the d100 helps keep the memory of Rolemaster.
2)  Higher numbers are more fun.  Getting an open-ended and saying "Two hundred thirty-six" is far nicer than "Forty-two."  It's personal taste, but that's just how I feel.

Additionally, I would argue that for some, there's no NEED to change to d20.  The rules are set up for d100, and so it's far easier to just Let It Be.

[GoblynByte]

Pretty much the only bit you're losing in translation to a lower resolution is the attribute bonuses for race and attribute level.  But since the charts all operate in increments of 5 or 10 anyway, you're losing very little granularity in the application.  I mean, when rolling an attack there is absolutely no difference in the result between a 73 and a 74.  They both read the exact same entry on the chart.

At the front end, I would agree that just leaving it be is probably the easier way to go.  But some people just don't enjoy* working the large numbers in the heat of combat and, in such cases, the d20fied approach can be quite attractive.

*Never confuse "don't enjoy" with "can't" or "incapable of."  

[RandalThor]

I just don't see the big deal about being firm on using a D100...  But I guess that is just me.  hehe.

I feel ya. I have been looking at using the HARP 20-fied with a Fantasy Craft game. Mainly because I can probably get some people here to play a d20 game much faster than a HARP/RM game, but also because some elements of the (Fantasy Craft) game itself intrigue me.

As for the 2d10, I like the ideas of bell-curves too (because it means you can actually say and mean, "average") but it would be a totally different game. A +1 means more in a 2d10 game than a d20 one. But if you are interested in a 2d10 game, check out the latest (and the version just prior, 3rd ed.?) Battletech RPG. It uses a 2d10 mechanic and is pretty-cool. Of course, you have to create a fantasy version, but I have done some of that if you would like to see it. (Not a lot, some.)

[Karizma]

2d10 actually does sound nice (mmh, bell curves), but it does require more math.  (d100 + OB - DB ) is more than (d10 + d10 + OB - DB).  The SIZE of the number is smaller, but the quantity of numbers ("quantity of numbers", that's almost ironic) is increased.

However, when I imagine d20-fying HARP, I would prefer 2d10 over 1d20.  But some questions come up like Fumble ranges, Open-Ended, (you can easily keep the GM's Option: UM 66!).  But balancing bonuses would be a bit tricky still.

[RandalThor]

Really, going to 2d10 is too different from 1d20. You can't just alter the numbers a bit and say all's good. Skill levels will have to be much different. For example, in the Battletech RPG skills rarely get above 5 ranks. Which means you will be rolling 2d10 and adding up to a +5 to reach a target number ranging from 8 (very easy) - 20 (nearly impossible). If you go with HARP skill ranks, you will definitely be saying that it is primarily the skill levels that matter (combined with attribute mods - which you don't get in the Battletech RPG) as very quickly they will be much higher than the average 2d10 roll.

D20 and d100 can be translated well enough to do simply. Altering to 2d10 is basically making a whole new game. IMO.

BTW, Karizma, is your keyboard Klingon? 

[GoblynByte]

2d10 actually does sound nice (mmh, bell curves), but it does require more math.  (d100 + OB - DB ) is more than (d10 + d10 + OB - DB).  The SIZE of the number is smaller, but the quantity of numbers ("quantity of numbers", that's almost ironic) is increased.

However, when I imagine d20-fying HARP, I would prefer 2d10 over 1d20.  But some questions come up like Fumble ranges, Open-Ended, (you can easily keep the GM's Option: UM 66!).  But balancing bonuses would be a bit tricky still.

Just about all fumble ranges would be either 0 or 1 except in those cases of really dangerous weapons.  Some might consider that a drag.

As far as getting an open ended roll, if the open ended target in HARP is 96 you're looking at the exact same chance of getting an open ended roll on a 20 with a d20 (remember that Rolemaster used that 96-100 range to emulate the same chance of a critical success on a d20).

[RandalThor]

I like bell curves too, but I came to the realization that with bell curves you must lessen the scale. Like d20 has a 1-20 attribute scale (for the most part, but really a 0-infinity one) while in the Battletech RPG the scale is 1-10 and the only way they can do that is because attributes don't add to skill ranks for anything. You only use skill rank when rolling skills, except for untrained* when the attribute might give an untrained bonus (of up to +2, I think). You would quickly burst the curve if you add in attributes with skill ranks.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

1d20 gives 20 results, so 1 = 5%

2d10 gives a bell curve with 19 possible results, which means that 1 is not equal to 5%. The percentage chance of any given number is essentially based on how many ways the 2 dice can combine to produce that number.

For 2d10, you have a 1% of getting a 2 and a 2% of getting a 3, and a 3% of getting a 4, and so forth up to 11 (of which you have a 10% chance of rolling), and then it declines again on down to 1% for rolling a 20.

Thus, if your fumble range was 01-05, you would likely change it to 2-4, and open-ended high rolls would either be 18-20 (6% chance) or 19-20 (3% chance)

[Thom @ ICE]

2d10 doesn't work with the rules as written. There is no easy conversion.

In order to play 1d20 you need to do all of the work between every game as 1d100, but then convert back to 1d20 version to play each week...

Character X levels up and increases his stats to go from +2 to +3 bonus on that stat bonus or increase his skills beyond the point where ranks grant +5 - once they grant +2 what's the point?... with that adjustment you now have skills going to the next bonus level in a 1d20 game sometimes and not going to the next level other times. 

Why do all of the work converting back and forth between games?

If it means so much to you to avoid the 1d100 and the high level math that's fine - but effectively it takes away the benefits of many actions within the HARP game and in my opinion the easier math is not worth throwing away the details that make the game great. I spend too much time creating and developing characters and trying to apply DPs appropriately to create those characters to have the whole thing tossed aside because of a fear of using large numbers.

If using d20 in the game is going to get you to play HARP when using a d100 would keep you from playing - then by all means, please play with the d20 - but there's no way I'd ever play in that game.

[masque1223]

Why do all of the work converting back and forth between games?

I'm not sure what work you're referring to.  I've been GMing HARP D20ified for 2 years now, and there hasn't been any noticeable extra work.  As for chargen, I have all my players using the OpenOffice template, and it does the D20ified conversions automatically, as it does all the regular D100 work automatically.  Maybe I'm missing something?

[SamwiseSeven]

Well if you did the 2D10 thing, you could always playtest it and see what tweaks you would need to make.  I did that in D&D once, and it was fine, but the die hards didn't like the way it felt either.

I guess some people just like the way things are, without someone like me coming along and messing it up.  

But ignoring the 2D10 thing, I don't see a big deal about switching to a D20.  But again, I'm not the norm on these boards.  hehe.

[Thom @ ICE]

Why do all of the work converting back and forth between games?

I'm not sure what work you're referring to.  I've been GMing HARP D20ified for 2 years now, and there hasn't been any noticeable extra work.  As for chargen, I have all my players using the OpenOffice template, and it does the D20ified conversions automatically, as it does all the regular D100 work automatically.  Maybe I'm missing something?

Using those tools, yes the conversions are automatic so you do not have the conversion issues I referenced.  You DO need to understand that character development is done in terms of a d100 system but gaming is done in a d20 environment.

It does not address the dozens of modifiers that are not multiples of +5 - including the skill bonuses once you get above 10 ranks (generally about 3rd-5th level). As I've said, enjoy playing it and have a great time, but please don't pretend that there are not lots of differences in the details. Lots of mechanics are built on adjustments that are not multiples of 5 and d20 will never be able to work for those.

[SamwiseSeven]

I guess I just don't care about the missing details.  But each to his own.  I won't force you to play with a 20-sided die. 

[Thom @ ICE]

And that's fine - to each their own. Best of luck with that d20 version.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

It does not address the dozens of modifiers that are not multiples of +5 - including the skill bonuses once you get above 10 ranks (generally about 3rd-5th level).

The HARP d20-fied rules do cover that, however, by having skill ranks cost more (i.e. the diminishing returns are handled through increased costs).

 

[Thom @ ICE]

I guess it's written somewhere else because the HARP d20fied document has no reference to DP costs, no comments regarding skill costs, no mention of DP's, etc. It does refer to fumbles and provides directions to address it - of course it requires an extra roll to resolve.

The Jonathan Dale spreadsheet costs everything exactly the same as standard HARP rules, but then does a rounding after the results are calculated.