Clarifications on the harpy

[Seven]

I was looking up what the BFRPG harpy is like and enlightenment never came.

If I google harpy images, there's 2 main take on the harpy.
One has wings in place of arms and the other has human arms and wings on the back.

The official description is "a giant vulture bearing the torso and face of a human female". That doesn't really commit either way.

So I thought, the attack pattern should clarify that but it's a weird, 2 claws/1 weapon + special. The damage is 1d4/1d4/1d6 or by weapon.

Are the claws meant to be talons and the weapon attack done with with a human hand? Are the claws on the wings and the weapon held in a talon?

The picture is really nice, but it shows no arms and normal feet wearing shoes.
Is that cognitive dissonance or maybe just the virus lingering?

[Solomoriah]

The short answer is, it's up to the GM to decide how to interpret it.

As to the image in the book... when you run a collaborative project and accept submissions from many people, sometimes there is a variation in each person's vision. Heck, this happens even with non-collaborative works sometimes.

[dymondy2k]

The short answer is, it's up to the GM to decide how to interpret it.

As to the image in the book... when you run a collaborative project and accept submissions from many people, sometimes there is a variation in each person's vision. Heck, this happens even with non-collaborative works sometimes.

Yeah the BFRPG Harpy picture does have an Olde English Mythology look to it..

[AlMan]

I was looking up what the BFRPG harpy is like and enlightenment never came.

If I google harpy images, there's 2 main take on the harpy.
One has wings in place of arms and the other has human arms and wings on the back.

The official description is "a giant vulture bearing the torso and face of a human female". That doesn't really commit either way.

So I thought, the attack pattern should clarify that but it's a weird, 2 claws/1 weapon + special. The damage is 1d4/1d4/1d6 or by weapon.

Are the claws meant to be talons and the weapon attack done with with a human hand? Are the claws on the wings and the weapon held in a talon?

The picture is really nice, but it shows no arms and normal feet wearing shoes.
Is that cognitive dissonance or maybe just the virus lingering?

Decided to look at the image again. Unlike other images of harpies this one is very PG rated (not showing the harpy's chest, like so many others like to do). The feet and if you notice the hand and arm under the monster are the victim laying in the nest. The wings are shown from the back but, still leave the arms and wings vs wings as arms still not fully shown. So I would say, as with most of the rules and ideas in the entire BF portfolio, that it is all up to you as the GM of your world. If you really want to, you could even make another version of the harpy and have one with arms and wings and the other having wings as arms.
Don't fret over the details, roll with it and have fun.

[Solomoriah]

Well heck, that's Al Cook's harpy. I was remembering the 1E-era harpy art, which was a public domain piece. I love Al's version, largely because the harpy's wings cover those anatomical details, leaving them to the imagination.

[Seven]

I'm kinda of undecided, really.
The intent of the post was mostly to ask what do your harpies look like?

I actually like the picture, but I wouldn't show it to players.
Unless maybe, I go with a harpy that throws shoes at opponents.
Clogs would work wonders.

[Dimirag]

Their attack patter is 2 claw and 1 weapon meaning they don't hold their weapon with their feet.
No flying movement penalty is given when armed, so I would say they have human arms.

[Tazer_The_Yoot]

Yeah. I'd go by the attack pattern if not sure, and the attack pattern to me suggests a creature whose claws are on its feet but which also has humanoid arms in addition to wings.

Whether or not its breasts are covered up are entirely up to the referee and what's appropriate for the players.

[Seven]

IF clearly states that they have no arms, but also includes the weapon attack.
The "head and torso of a woman" on a vulture description would also indicate no arms.

I think the arms came with the advanced version of the game, maybe along with the ability to charm by touch. Gary was always a revisionist.

Normally, the 3rd attack could have been a bite, but the harpy might still be singing at that point.
So, maybe only 2 attacks unless the target is not charmed or the target will become free on the next round.

For weapons, it seems the harpy would be best suited to dropping things from a height.
Maybe a net? Or a basket full of stones? Maybe some local fruits...
You wouldn't believe the nasty stuff that grows here.

[Tazer_The_Yoot]

I suppose it's possible the Harpy attacks twice with one foot and is holding a sword or mace in the other? I would assume if it had a net or something that would be noted because such an attack generally has a special attribute similar to a spider's web. Although, of course, yours could easily. Your game, your rules, and that would make them more deadly. I think if I adopt that I'll have it for like the lead Harpy. The Matriarch. That'd give her a nasty edge over the rest of her brood. A boss creature should have a little extra "oomf".