QuoteMake it clear what the trade-offs are for wearing a lot of armor.

Good point! And don't forget the social aspects too when the PCs are in towns, before nobles, etc. In our age not just anybody can wear full SWAT gear and stand near a mid/high level elected official.

All of the above are valid downsides to wearing armour, but the most telling (and funniest) cost came when the characters were travelling down river on a barge.  The "tank" refused to take off his armour, even after warnings.  One day they were attacked by Vlasta (Eaters of eyes), who they had encountered before, and taken one of the tanks eyes through his helmet eye slot.
He had the bright idea of turning his helmet around to protect his remaining eye.  His eye was now safe.....but not being able to see where you are going, in a fight, on a barge, in full plate can only ever lead to one ending........

A difference between HarnMaster and my campaign is a difference of 500 years or so. So this affects not only the armour issue, but also the "chivalric arms" issue.

My campaign is  set in something like Anglo-Saxon England, 600-700, but one where there were never Romans. So plate armour doesn't exist in any form, certainly not the full plates and not even the lorica segmenta. If the PCs visit the mainland, they'll have to go through weeks of travel through people like themselves, and only after that will they encounter the Empire, with some equivalent of lorica segmenta for heavy infantry. There'll be no plate armour for cavalry because the Empire hasn't yet bred the large horses that can bear a heavy man with all his gear wearing it.

Chain will be the greatest prize they can hope for. At this time, pure iron without little chunks of impurities was worth one-quarter to one-half its weight in silver. So a chain byrnie with a weight of 21lbs would have a value in its iron alone of £5-£10; adding in the work would bring it to twice that. By comparison, peasant farmers might earn £1 annually, and a well-off thane have an income of £20 or so - but three-quarters of that income goes straight back to the people under him.

In a previous campaign, one of the PCs inherited the thanedom and a treasury of £100, but as the previous thane had remitted all taxes, had to go off adventuring anyway, and in the process won the Maestgold, a dragon-guarded hoard of gold, silver, precious stones and the like worth £1,000. With this he was able to support his friend in his bid to become Cyning (King) of all the land, not by buying armour, but by hiring men who already had armour. A few hundred men with metal armour were able to determine the fate of the entire kingdom.

That's how it was in the Dark Ages. It wasn't the days of mass armies, but of smallish armies. These are the days, of course, in which a single hero - or at least, a party of heroes - could determine the fate of countries. Good days for adventuring, even if you don't have a lot of armour

I'm one of Kyle's players (the absent, anniversary having one). Harn wasn't my first choice, but I've been hearing about it for years and so I'm pretty keen to play. I'll try to remember to post my impressions here.

Out of interest, having not read the rules, how easy is it to loose body parts etc in combat? Do the rules model that?

Quote from: OliveI'm one of Kyle's players (the absent, anniversary having one). Harn wasn't my first choice, but I've been hearing about it for years and so I'm pretty keen to play. I'll try to remember to post my impressions here.

Out of interest, having not read the rules, how easy is it to loose body parts etc in combat? Do the rules model that?

Yeah it has amupation rules. If you do a strike that has an impact of 17 or better on the following hit locations you are looking at a roll to see if the part amputated. Neck, Upper Arm, Elbow, Forearm, Hand, Groin (Ouch!), Thigh, Knee, Calf, Foot. I don't have the rules in front of me at the moment but I believe like other rolls it is a save against an attribute modified by your current physical penalty (injury plus encumbrance).

On a different note the third edition rules can be had for $10. http://www.columbiagames.com/cgi-bin/query/cfg/zoom.cfg?product_id=4001L
They come punched for a three ring binder and with a pair of combat charts.

This is one of the better deals around for an RPG. However it is without a magic or religious system those are separate purchases $30 each. Plus those two come with a lot of Harn specific info. The Religous more than the Magic.

Quote from: OliveI'm one of Kyle's players (the absent, anniversary having one). Harn wasn't my first choice, but I've been hearing about it for years and so I'm pretty keen to play. I'll try to remember to post my impressions here.

I look forward to reading these!

Quote from: OliveOut of interest, having not read the rules, how easy is it to loose body parts etc in combat? Do the rules model that?

Yes, while the below is from the 3rd edition they show the rules your GM can use (there are also rules for bleeders, etc.) you can also loose feet, etc from frostbite:

❏ Limb Injuries
Any Serious injury on the Arm/Shoulder
requires a fumble roll, and one to the Leg
(includes Hip) requires a stumble roll. Any
Grievous injury to a limb is an automatic
fumble or stumble and renders the limb
unusable. A wing/tail/tentacle is rendered
unusable if it receives a grevious injury.
A bipedal creature with one usable leg can
crawl unaided, or rise and walk with the
aid of a staff/crutch/etc. A quadruped
with three good legs may rise/walk, at half
effective Move. Unusable limbs become
usable again when they heal to M1.

❏ Amputations ()
With a Grievous Edge strike, the body
part noted may be amputated. Roll the
indicated number of d6 (G4 roll 4d6). Do
not include any additional dice for other
injuries. If the result exceeds one-tenth of
the victim's weight, the part is severed.
With Amputation of a Limb, an automatic
stumble or fumble occurs and the wound
level is always G5. Whether Amputation
occurs or not, make a normal Shock Roll.

Cool. I've been pushing for GURPS in the game because

a) Kyle seems to know it pretty well
b) I've got the rules and never played it

and most importantly

3) I've mostly been a DnD player and I've been wanting a rules system that more accurately models the impact of combat. I want combat to be a real risk. I played a bit of WFRP and found the combat system kind of annoying and I thought GURPS might be the sort of thing I wanted to play and eventually GM.

But Harn sounds like fun and like will give me all of number 3 without having the side effects of grumpy other players who hate GURPS.

Quote from: Olive3) I've mostly been a DnD player and I've been wanting a rules system that more accurately models the impact of combat. I want combat to be a real risk. I played a bit of WFRP and found the combat system kind of annoying and I thought GURPS might be the sort of thing I wanted to play and eventually GM.

But Harn sounds like fun and like will give me all of number 3 without having the side effects of grumpy other players who hate GURPS.

Not to threadjack but one trick I found that works is a well prepared packet of templates. Along with an explanation of what the choices mean. That works when people are intimidated by the trying to put together characters using the GURPS Rules.

You should be satisfied in #3 with Harnmaster. GURPS 4th + Martial Arts 4th is a winner as far as realistic feel. But Harnmaster injury system still works better. Where GURPS has Harnmaster beat is on the rules for hitting people with feints, beats, locks, and so on.

However one problem Harnmaster doesn't have via GURPS is the problem of the guy with the high defense skill. With combat being resolved by opposed rolls compared in a matrix something is usually always happening. The matrix are simple enough that they don't bog down play. Again just give everyone a copy of the combat card.

I'm glad to see Olive commenting. He normally doesn't comment on forums, he must have a life or something strange like that

At first glance at the rules, it seems relatively easy to lose limbs in combat. 2-4d6 against 12-16, basically it's a 50-50. A good whack with a sword or axe on an unarmoured victim should do it.

That "something's always happening" because of the combat tables also seemed interesting to me. For those who haven't seen it, what happens is that attacker and defender both roll. Then each gets a result as normal in any game - critical success, success, failure or critical failure. The two are cross-referenced on a table to give you 1 of 16 results. In addition, the defender gets to choose one of four actions when defending - block, dodge, counterstrike or ignore. The counterstrike is interesting - the defender's more likely to get hit, but if they're not, they're actually likely to hit the attacker.

So in most cases, whatever people roll, something will happen. Whereas in GURPS, RuneQuest, etc, when both have a very high or very low skill, many turns pass with nothing happening, which of course is not fun.

The three-ring binder rules have two copies of the combat tables. Perhaps I'll get one laminated in case of Fanta explosions

It's interesting that the Columbia Games site has the books cheaper than does ebay.

Quote from: Kyle AaronI'm glad to see Olive commenting. He normally doesn't comment on forums, he must have a life or something strange like that

I used to be in the top 100 posters over at ENWorld, and I post a wee bit on RPG.net. But the ENWorld stuff was when I was avoiding writing my MA.

QuoteIt's interesting that the Columbia Games site has the books cheaper than does ebay.

Oh dear. I didn't think to look at that and just bought the binder version off eBay. Bugger.

Except I just looked and didn't see the version you're using.

Ah, that's true, a new edition. Mind you, the CG page says of the 3rd,

The system is largely unchanged from the second edition and migration is easy.  

But then, you have to wonder why you should buy a new but "largely unchanged" edition. The one estar linked us to was the 3rd "light" edition for $10, while the other is $30; it's not clear what the differences are.

Well anyway, whatever we get we'll make good use of it. No coups this time

Now what I really want is some pre-painted miniatures for Dark Ages characters. I'll have to have a look around.

Quote from: Kyle AaronBut then, you have to wonder why you should buy a new but "largely unchanged" edition. The one estar linked us to was the 3rd "light" edition for $10, while the other is $30; it's not clear what the differences are.

The difference between the $30 version and the $10 version is the box, character sheets, and a nice GM Screen.

3rd edition gets you some extra rules like horse mounted combat, some monster articles on Ivashu and Gargun. Jousting rules. On the harn forum there is a comparsion. I bought a copy of the $10 version and I am glad I did.

Quote from: bottgMy one recommendation would be to ban plate armour.  A knight in quilted + Chain + Plate becomes almost impossible to damage!

Once that is applied, it is a fantastic system

Historically that is pretty accurate, you kill a knight by knocking him over, swarming him with peasants so he can't get up and then stabbing him in the eye through his helmet.

The Ars Magica supplement, Ordo Nobilis, discusses this with an example from an actual battle.  Plate mail clad knights were nigh on invulnerable in one on one combats, they either got worn down from fatigue (at which point you could pin them down) or swarmed by lots of lightly armoured opponents (at which point you could pin them down).

Quote from: BalbinusHistorically that is pretty accurate, you kill a knight by knocking him over, swarming him with peasants so he can't get up and then stabbing him in the eye through his helmet.
QUOTE]

Something similar happened in another session of that same campaign.  The knight, able to face off against most opponents, was taken down by 6 unarmoured and not particularly skilled pilgrims with quarterstaves.  The outnumbering (each subsequent defensive action being at a further minus) meant that although not badly injured, he had acquired a whole heap of bruises (-5 action), and just fell over.  Luckily they wern't out to kill him!

Quote from: bottg

Quote from: BalbinusHistorically that is pretty accurate, you kill a knight by knocking him over, swarming him with peasants so he can't get up and then stabbing him in the eye through his helmet.
QUOTE]

Something similar happened in another session of that same campaign.  The knight, able to face off against most opponents, was taken down by 6 unarmoured and not particularly skilled pilgrims with quarterstaves.  The outnumbering (each subsequent defensive action being at a further minus) meant that although not badly injured, he had acquired a whole heap of bruises (-5 action), and just fell over.  Luckily they wern't out to kill him!

Cool, I have to say, that really does sound medieval in tone.

Hm, perhaps I should look at HM again...