Review Score:

When reviewing any game or in this case piece of gaming literature, the reviewer has to ask him or herself whether or not they feel like the game in question can stand up to the test of time. This may not be an actual question per se, but just a sort of gut instinct one gets from a basic overview of the game in question. Unfortunately, my knee-jerk reaction to HackMaster Basic is “no.”

Don’t misinterpret this initial response as dismissive on my part; I am an open-minded person and I respect what Kenzer and Company as well as the Knights of the Dinner Table are doing with this book. A direct quote from the foreward states that they “created HackMaster with one goal in mind – to be the game we ourselves would buy and want to play with our friends” (Basic 2). As stated before, I respect that, and what’s more, not only do I respect it, but I understand it. I’ve been there. The whole reason I created my own campaign setting was so that I could have freedoms where otherwise I would feel constrained by preconceived ideas in already-established campaign settings. However, the difference between my campaign setting and HackMaster is that they not only have created a new world to roleplay in, but they have also created a different way to roleplay, a different system. While different is good, the problem lies in the corporate question: if the d20 system and fantasy roleplaying has basically been defined and refined by Dungeons and Dragons, TSR, and now Wizards of the Coast, why shake the boat? What makes HackMaster better or more lasting as a roleplaying genre than anything else that has come along? Although it may seem overly critical, I feel I am simply being honest when I answer that last question by saying “nothing.”

While this was an interesting book to read, I find nothing in it that makes me want to convert from standard D&D. It seems like a step backward into the days of THAC0, which makes me shudder. Chapter 1 starts out much as one would expect from a roleplaying basebook: basic character creation, etc. However, two things that jump out at me as being odd and frankly not needed are the added “Looks” attribute (in addition to Charisma . . . what’s wrong with just good old Charisma?), as well as a requirement for each character to have one Quirk and Flaw, explained in further detail in the third chapter of the book.

I suppose my biggest problem with the whole “quirks and flaws” idea is that the book REQUIRES characters to have one quirk and one flaw. It just seems too contrived to me; what’s wrong with a player playing his or her character how he or she wants without requiring a specific problem area or areas? I like the idea of potential quirks and flaws that may be adopted by a player for his or her character if that player wishes, but I see no need to require it.

Chapter 2 focuses on a mechanic called “Honor Points” or a character having an “Honor Score.” This is initially calculated by adding all seven attribute scores, then dividing by seven, then rounded down for an average total . . . then adding Charisma and Looks modifiers. Seems like a lot of unneeded math to me. Apparently, Honor Points “defines how the character measures up to society’s ideals of courage, integrity, and inner strength . . . . Honor is important because it influences the way others treat your character and can affect your luck” (Basic 25). Isn’t this kind of the point of roleplaying a character out from a low level to a higher one? I mean, starting out at level one, every character is a nobody. The whole idea of adventuring and gaining experience and renown is to go from nothing to something in the eyes of the rest of the world. Chapter 2 goes on to say that the Honor Score is not a reflection of good or evil, but if this is truly the case I would immediately disagree with the wording; what this score reflects is popularity and recognition of a character, not a notion of honor. Yes, while some evilly-aligned characters can be honorable at times while following their own code of ethics, ultimately there is no honor in evil acts, and borderline at best with acts of neutrality. Perhaps this is simply my personal opinion, but I can guarantee a decent number of geeks and gamers would agree with me on this.

Chapter 4 deals with character classes, which offer nothing more than the basic “fantastic four” balance: fighter, thief, mage/wizard (arcane magic-user), and cleric/priest (divine magic-user). While we’re on that subject, HackMaster Basic also only supports the four basic player races: humans, elves, dwarves, and halflings. So, basically this book offers nothing more than standard 1st Edition Dungeons and Dragons. I could spend some time outlining chapters 5 through 9, but again, there really is no need, because they all focus on basic principles too similar to D&D: skills & proficiencies; armor, weapons, and equipment; mage spells; cleric spells; and combat. Sorry HackMaster, but you fail to offer anything new and shiny here. Maybe you give some different names, but it’s all the same stuff, just thirty years too late.

Perhaps my biggest problem with HackMaster is that the entire 12th chapter focuses on nothing but dice: dice-rolling, color of dice, “dice rolling zones” and “designated dice rolling zones”, purchasing dice, dice priming, care and maintenance, lucky dice, attitude, purging “bad” or “unlucky” dice, retiring dice, procedures of rolling dice (the prep, the shake, and the release), dice-rolling methods, good vs. bad rolls, and dice rolling don’ts. Wow. Ten to twelve pages of nothing but gibberish and nonsense about dice. In an under-200-page book, this is frankly needless and ultimately constitutes a waste of space. Even if meant as a joke section to the book, they take the joke way too far, but really, who would want to market a joke section in an otherwise semi-serious roleplaying book? It’s just too informal for me, I guess. When I sit down to roleplay, I am there to have a good time of course, but I also expect a modicum of seriousness and respect for the game in question; otherwise, it’s just a waste of time to me, and I don’t feel like this book caters to my personal roleplaying wants and needs in a serious enough manner.

I readily admit that perhaps many people would enjoy this book and playing in the HackMaster world, and more power to them. I just feel that for me, HackMaster is a step backward and a rehashing of rookie materials and concepts. Roleplaying is largely a private matter between a group of friends and how seriously or jokingly they make the experience. For me, HackMaster doesn’t cut it, but that doesn’t mean it might not be right for someone else. So, now that you’ve read my scathing review, and now that Kenzer and Company will probably never send me another review copy of anything, I suggest that you go to your nearest store which carries roleplaying supplements (preferably one that has more than a few basic books), and see for yourself which roleplaying setting and/or series of books best caters to your own wants and needs. And no matter what, stick to your guns; always keep an open mind, but never falter from what you know you like and what works for you and your roleplaying group.

Until next time, have fun . . . and play nice!