Topic: HARP D20-Fied Revisited

[RandalThor]

All of this is why I said it would be much more than just using 2d10 for HARP. Lots of changes would need to be made that aren't by switching from d100 to d20.

Isn't having a higher bonus better in a bell curve system than a linear one? If I have a bonus at level one of +5 and my target number is 11, that means I need to roll a six or higher to succeed. Next level my bonus goes up to +6, so now I need a five or higher (for that 11+). If we keep going each +1 is better because the difference between rolling the next lower is more significant in a 2d10 system than a d20 system, right? So instead of diminishing (or flat) returns you actually get increasing returns with higher skill ranks in a 2d10 system. Right?

This is why the skill ranks in the Battletech RPG are low. Having a +3 at chargen is pretty great. Getting up to a +5 means your are one of the best at that skill. Of course, they don't set the base TN at 21, but at 10 with modifiers for difficulty. Which is why I said the scale would shrink.

[masque1223]

For me the biggest problem with DnD (3.X and the ilk) was the fact that it was impossible... impossible to actually kill a 5th level fighter on the first hit - without throwing in a whole bunch of special abilities and feats that really had to be crafted from the beginning of character creation (or by being at least 8-10 levels higher than them and having some mass damage capability, like a Fireball). With RM/HARP the dirty beggars in the alley with knives can be a threat, not an impossible, perfectly balanced encounter, but still a threat if you aren't a bit smart about how you deal with them. I like that. The rest of the game (Fantasy Craft / D20) is OK to me.

OK, well that makes D20 system combat sound worse than I thought.  I've read the books, but haven't played with the system more than a session or two.  There were already plenty of reasons for me to dislike it just based on reading the books, now you've added another.

I'm so glad my initiation into roleplaying was with MERP and Star Wars.  I tried D&D 2E years later, didn't like it then, and haven't liked any iteration since.  I have none of the nostalgia that my players suffer from where they keep banging their heads against D&D trying to find ways to "fix" it and have it still be D&D.  They are really enjoying HARP, but they also still play D&D and then complain to me about the system problems.  They're like a guy with a sore tooth who can't stop touching it.

[RandalThor]

but they also still play D&D and then complain to me about the system problems.  They're like a guy with a sore tooth who can't stop touching it.

That sounds exactly like my friend. When he lived here he played in a DnD game (3.5) for a while but would complain about every game, for months! I just didn't understand it.

[Marc R]

Rand,

Roll wise, HARP/RM are linear

2d10 is a curve, or an angle at least.

This results in all results being equally likely in d20/d100, but being more likely to the middle, less likely to the ends in 2d10.

See this pic:

[Marc R]

Since the odds in play are usually more about hitting a number or lower, not a given result, you actually end up with a climbing linear progression, vs an S curve.

Which turns mods into a zoo where at certain points they're worth a lot, at the top and bottom end they're worth little. . .so +1 is worth 5% in HARP/RM but worth anything from 1 to 10 back to 1 again in 2d10. . .making mods weird to say the least.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Roll wise, HARP/RM are linear

2d10 is a curve, or an angle at least.

And bonus-wise, they are reversed....  

RM/HARP: -25/5/2/1 (looks like a curve/angle to me)
2d10 (+1 per rank): linear rank progression.

I kinda think that RM (and thus HARP) has curves built into it in several spots (rank progressions, the stat bonuses (more of an angle, but in HOW they are associated to the stats is more of a curve), just not in its rolls (though open-ended rolls do give a kinda curve-like twist (or reverse-curve maybe) to even dice rolls).

Moving from d100 to 2d10 seems to me to be changing roll from linear to curve, and rank bonuses from curved to linear.

While not a null sum conversion, I don't think that the end result is far enough apart to be called an "utterly different game". Even though the feel would be different to some degree, it wouldn't be so far away as to make the game unrecognizable (especially since many of the other aspects remain essentially the same).

Anyways, that is my opinion on it..

[RandalThor]

Rand,

Roll wise, HARP/RM are linear

2d10 is a curve, or an angle at least.

Which is why, when you are looking to roll a certain number or higher you get greater returns on higher bonuses.

But,

When you get to about 6 and lower the actual percentage difference between the necessary number rolled is less than a 5% difference - that is what you are saying, right? So, so long as the necessary number rolled is in the 8-12 range the difference is the greatest, but once you get past that (either way) the difference is less. Right?

[Marc R]

Rand,

correct.

But keep in mind that it's not merely curved (as the HARP/RM rank/bones progressions are) but dual curved into an S formation.

Rasyr,

The ENORMOUS difference, lies in static and non static factors.

With d20 or D100, the odds of accomplishing any task are modified by a curved rank progression, but remain static in play, with the roll being linear.

In 2d10, your progression is static, but all in the moment calculations are curved and irregular.

Which results in the fact that you gain any benefits of curvature in the current d100/d20 model, while still being able to predict results accurately by "gut" on the fly, while with 2d10 you gain the benefit of always moving up in a static an linear manner in character development, but in exchange, at the moment of high variability, the odds are opaque and harder to assess by gut.

It's a YMMV moment, but I prefer the way RM/HARP currently put all my mathmatical heavy lifting into the front end of char development, when I have effectively unlimited time to contemplate, and make on the spot assessment of "What are my odds of succeeding with these modifiers" as simple, straightforward and gut simple as possible. As I've said, there's nothing wrong with 2d10, it's just not RM/HARP, and in my opinion, it's less user friendly when you tack a curved roll mechanic into the middle of a flat roll mechanic system. . .there are loads of odd bits and ends that result.

[pastaav]

The problem with the curve of 2d10 is essentially that the GM need to assign different modifiers depending on the values involved to get the desired results. Should he assign -1 or -2 to make it slightly harder to succeed?...he can not really know before he has investigated the players skill value and all other involved modifiers.

For RM there there are discontinuities at the thresholds of Open Ended rolls that potentially can give surprises, but generally just a general feeling of the involved skills is enough to say how much harder things get if you change -5 to -10.

[SamwiseSeven]

Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned the 2D10...

 

For me the difference between a D20, or a D100 is basically the same, as both are linear, and most of the HARP charts are divided by 5 or close to 5.

If anyone made the switch to 2D10, they would have to adjust some things, but that is what I like about RPGs.  So I guess I am one for having a game with a different feel. 

[Marc R]

Are you currently playing 2d10?

[SamwiseSeven]

I'm currently running D20-Fied, but only as 1-shots at conventions and my gaming club now and again.  If I had a campaign, I would try to use 2D10 and expect to tweak things as I went.

[Karizma]

Do you think you could "improve" d20fied by constructing it in d20 form, like characters and such?  So like, instead of (1-100 stats yields Stat bonuses + Racial bonuses ) / 5, just have it d20 through-and-through?

[Marc R]

Samwise,

So you're currently playing d20fied then. . .this 2d10 stuff was speculative.

Karizma,

Would need a bit of work to make the 2/1 part of the 5/2/1 skill bonus progressions work.

[RandalThor]

Do you think you could "improve" d20fied by constructing it in d20 form, like characters and such?  So like, instead of (1-100 stats yields Stat bonuses + Racial bonuses ) / 5, just have it d20 through-and-through?

By using d20fied with an existing d20 game is how I look to do that. (Fantasy Craft specifically.) Many of the older RM products had in them a chart with the d100/d20 (and sometimes 1-12) scale so you could look to them.

[SamwiseSeven]

Yeah, the 2D10 was speculative as HARP goes.  I haven't run a face-to-face HARP game using D100 for quite some time now.  I am running a HARP D100 PBP though.

I did run a few 1-shots of D&D though using 2D10.  I just lowered the critical threats, and got rid of the 2nd roll to confirm the crits.  I liked it.  It seemed to reward those with skill, over those with just a lucky roll.

In my games, on the print out character sheets, I divide the Stat bonuses by 5, and I've gotten rid of the negative penalty for zero ranks in a skill.  So they only have the skills on their character sheet that they have ranks in.  When they need to roll a skill that they don't have on their character sheet, I just tell them which stat bonuses to add together, and then roll.  Most stat bonuses end up being 0, +1, or +2.

[Right Wing Wacko]

I played D20-fied with Sam before and thought it was fine. Had the familiarity of D&D with the freshness of HARP. I rather enjoyed it!

His initiative card system was cool too!

[Witchking20k]

I've played HARP using 2D10 before, it was fun.  Rewarded skill more than luck, and provided a more "heroic" scale of game......I might consider it for rolemaster one day

[Marc R]

How did it play at low levels?

What did you need to change? (Did you just use the d20fied mechanic of "calc the d100 bonus/5"?)

[Witchking20k]

Well 2D10 gives you an average roll of 10-12 (or something there abouts).  Stats ranged from 01-20, bonuses from 1-5 (13-14, 15-16, 17-18,19,20).  I used the racial stat bonuses to modify the stat rolls (so +3 would make 10. 13, yielding a +1), resistances were divided by 5 (+30=+6)....I can't remember the rest....but I did enjoy it enogh to flog the idea a bit here. 

I chose to use 2xstats per skill & limit charcters to 2+2xlevel ranks in skills.

Hit Points I left the same, only because I didn\t want to convert the charts on the fly

All in all i like it enough to work at converting RM to it....