PDA

View Full Version : Harp with RMC ruleset.



Asterionaisien
December 28th, 2016, 14:40
Hello, I've recently discovered the existence of the Harp system..there is perchance some way to play it with the RMC ruleset here?
I played Rolemaster and merp a lot back in the day, and this harp systems feels (to me, at least) like a streamlined and modernized MERP version.
While the differences are numerous, it dont feels impossible to overcome them, at least on a first glance.
Any thoughts?

Ardem
December 30th, 2016, 00:10
Not played with harp however, I think RMC is an many respects he streamline version of rolemaster. There have not been HARP extension created, so you might have a bit of difficulty, if you have not tried RMC compared to old school FRP or RM2 you might be pleasantly surprised.

Asterionaisien
December 30th, 2016, 11:43
While I do not dislike rolemaster (any edition) at all, people are scared by its unwieldiness and it's nigh impossible (at least in Italy)to find a group for it. Harp imo has more modern and streamlined concepts, so i hope to find someone to play it, at worst through skype and using FG only for rolls and maps.
About checking the differences between Harp and RMC I cant do it because i do not own the latter ruleset.
I would not mind to GM a RMC (or Harp) campaign to a group if someone gift me the ruleset tho. :p

JohnD
December 30th, 2016, 21:35
Oh man you are in for a treat. FG handles Rolemaster's perceived "unwieldy" nature like a hot knife through butter, taming the system and caring for the vast majority of what made it a beast to GM automatically and effortlessly.

Dark Mullisha
December 31st, 2016, 02:44
Play a Harp/RMC Hybrid system as I like the spell system and Character Gen.
Use RMC Combat as it is so simple on FG.

cheers
Mark

Asterionaisien
December 31st, 2016, 10:20
Oh man you are in for a treat. FG handles Rolemaster's perceived "unwieldy" nature like a hot knife through butter, taming the system and caring for the vast majority of what made it a beast to GM automatically and effortlessly.

I guessed so, after all RM is computer designed since the '90, especially the combat tables... ;)

Jokes aside, i'll look around better about RMC, after all atm is on sale..



Play a Harp/RMC Hybrid system as I like the spell system and Character Gen.
Use RMC Combat as it is so simple on FG.

cheers
Mark

You say it's possible? Can you elaborate please?

Dark Mullisha
January 3rd, 2017, 07:37
I brought over some players who were Savage Worlds and D&D players and when we played RMC the characters just overwhelmed them they never played anything like this so I made it simpler with Harp.

I set all the skills and spells up using a character mule, and using the group names to sort them e.g. all the athlete skills appear together and all Mage sphere spells appear together etc.
This allows all the skills to be available to the characters when they need them. I also set up some character sheet templates to help with rolling up new characters.

All skills cost 2 or 4 per rank so they are written up as either 2/* or 4/*, this allows you to learn more than 2 ranks at a time.
RMC divides the stats by how many stats bonus types and Harp adds them up, so I use the level bonus column and just add the stat bonus again this allows the computer to calculate them, all the talent bonuses and character bonuses are added in the skills, everything in Harp is basically a skill, this includes spells.

I don't use the Harp combat as John D said FG makes it so easy to use RMC. I did try the Harp system for combat but it was slower than RMC.

Everything else is the same as RMC.
also use the smooth stats bonus extension.

The Harp Magic system is one of the best systems ever done with the power point increases and rank limits , way better than Rolemaster.

cheers
Mark

Dark Mullisha
January 3rd, 2017, 07:40
I did Harp in FG Core rule and the MoreCore rule sets.
This is a very manual method no auto skill calcs like you can get with the RMC ruleset.
cheers
Mark

Asterionaisien
January 3rd, 2017, 19:39
Thank you very much for your explanation :)