Here is the official Combat Example(PDF):
http://www.kenzerco.com/hackmaster/downloads/HMPHB_illustrated_example.pdf

Quote from: greylond;527395Well, at this point the combat system has been played by many groups out there. Being involved in playtesting and a regular on the K&Co forums I get to read/hear about many people's experiences with it and it not only works but is well received.

Basically, from my experience and from what I've read/heard about from multiple sources is that it works, and works very well...

I never said it didn't work.  But it doesn't work for me.  Or for my group.  And the combat system may have been played by many groups, but the AD&D system has been played by many, many more.      I have HMB and I've read it thoroughly several times, though we haven't tried it.  There's no need.  It's way too fiddly for our tastes.  The standard turn based  method also works and much better in my opinion.  With group initiative, there's no need to count, no monkeying about with tracking where exactly I am each second and no wondering why it takes 12 seconds to swing a battleaxe.

See that's exactly what I was saying. HM is a rulebook that plays a lot different than it seems from just reading it. It may seem like it is too fiddly but honestly without playing it, you really don't see how easy it is to play/GM. I recommend either trying it or sitting down for a Demo at a GameDay/Convention and I think you'll understand...

Quote from: Aos;527070Sure it is a totally valid question, it's just one that is often used around here to invalidate other people's opinions of just about any game they do not like.

Also you're post above seems to preclude the notion that someone might have tried the game and just not like it. i mean you're talking about "every single person" in caps no less.

The below post proves my point.

Quote from: JRR;527991I have HMB and I've read it thoroughly several times, though we haven't tried it.

I wasn't aware that JRR was Every. Single.Person.

My fault, I should know better than to engage an apologist.

You misquoted me, again.

Try reading the entire sentence instead of taking the first six words out of context...

Quote from: greylond;527068I ask because EVERY Single person who I have known to GM it if for more than one session has said that it flows pretty fast for them. I only know one person who has said that he GMs HM4 faster and that is Topher and that is he has a great memory and literally has every chart/rule in HM4 memorized and quote it, at any time...

IME, the only people that say that HM combat is too much info that makes it too slow are people who haven't actually played or GMed it for more than one combat...

So, therefore I asked about his experience with the game, a perfectly valid question...

Quote from: greylond;527999The below post proves my point.

That's the same old tired thing I've heard for decades.  I heard it about 3e and then 4e.  All you have is internet snippets, you can't judge it yet.  Three months later - well, all you have is playtest reports, you can't judge it by that.  On release - Well, you've read the book, but you haven't actually played the game, you don't know if you'll like it or not.  When does it stop?  One session?  Three?  A yearlong campaign?  I'm hearing the same about 5e, and now Hackmaster.  It's a load of crap.  I don't have to eat a turd to know I won't like it.

Edit:  I'm not calling Hackmaster a load of crap, just the idea that I must actually sit down and play a game before I can judge it.  A thorough reading and understanding is enough.

Don't know about any other game, but HM yea, I don't really think you can judge it without playing it. If you don't believe me, play it once or twice...

Quote from: greylond;528007You misquoted me, again.

Try reading the entire sentence instead of taking the first six words out of context...

Fair enough, but I don't really that's going to make a difference. You seem very, very committed to being perceived as objectively right. Honestly, man, if I weren't totally put off by point buy CG, that attitude would turn me off from the game. Whatever, though, I'm glad you have a game that you like so much. Have fun with it.

Just trying to point out that in my experience, those that have complained that it is too complicated, or fiddly or too slow, are those that have read it and haven't played it. IMO, those that say that are really putting forth an inaccurate "review" of the game. I mean, if you are going to make those kinds of complaints about at game it would only be logical to have played it, or at least post the qualifier that they haven't played it.

Part of my attitude comes from years of the same kinds of complaints about HM4, i.e. people complain about it without really playing it and then go around the 'Net making inaccurate information about it.

Quote from: greylond;528046Part of my attitude comes from years of the same kinds of complaints about HM4, i.e. people complain about it without really playing it and then go around the 'Net making inaccurate information about it.

But you're not talking to those people, and this isn't that conversation. It's a fucked up way to conduct a dialogue. And HM4 is hardly special in that regard, that shit happens to virtually every game that gets printed.

Still, so for IME, the only people to make those complaints are those that haven't played it. I know people who have GMed it and don't like it, but their reasons aren't the same. Usually it is because it isn't AD&D based.

Again, if you are going to say that a game is too complicated and/or Too Fiddly then a reasonable person would assume that you've played it and found it that way. I don't think it is too unreasonable to ask that someone who makes that kind of claim to qualify their claim with the fact that they haven't actually played it.

nice dodge there.

I'd have to say if a game "plays differently than it reads" to such an extent that it turns people off from the game before they ever try it, you have a problem with the writing, which wont be fixed by telling people they need to play the game-  and certainly not by being really smug about it.

Well, one of the things about the new HM is that some old RPG players have a harder time picking up some of the concepts than totally new RPG players, but that isn't the fault of the game system, that's because we as old RPG players have gotten into many old habits/concepts and HM breaks a lot of those.

I don't see any of that as a fault of the game system writing...

Quote from: Aos;527044The classic #3!

Yay, i'm famous!