Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 3762362" data-attributes="member: 3586">Worse than that, I'm afraid. Magic-Users have sleep at 1st level!Anyone who has played with me - of whom there are very people on these boards - know that my favourite classes are wizard, bard and cleric. Two of those are support characters. I'm generally happy playing such a character because there are a few compensations, one of which is that I play high-Int, high-Cha characters who take the leadership role in the group - and Clerics and Bards are great at that.My friends love having me around, on the rare occasions I play rather than DM, because I *will* take that leadership position. They're there to enjoy the game, but they prefer someone else to be making the hard decisions and being the primary "face" of the group. So, I have my time in the sun, and even if my character is a little less effective in the combat side of the game, I can still be useful and make tactical decisions.My highest level 3e character is a 14th level cleric of Pelor that I played from 1st level. I had a blast with him, even if later on my role was merely to heal the barbarian... although my utility spells would often prove very useful. I was the only PC in that campaign not to die - and it was a lethal game. However, from watching my friends avoid the cleric, and seeing the reactions of those coerced into playing it... it has issues. I'm about to redesign the stats of the Cleric in our Savage Tide game - make him a Cleric 5/Crusader 1. What he loses in the one spell level he gives up will be made up for by the actual fun stuff the Crusader can do. (Healing when you hit in melee? That gives you a reason to be there!)The Hunter? Urgh. I don't own Iron Heroes, although I spent some time perusing the rules during the 4 sessions I've played of it. It certainly didn't help that the GM created the characters, and saddled me with a 10 Charisma, no-Diplomacy skilled PC. My role as the party spokesman was toast then. But, hey, I'm an experienced roleplayer! I can do the silent hunter, being quietly effective!Hmm. I can help people ignore cover. Including myself, mind you. And I can ignore difficult terrain. Well some of it. If I spend a round not doing stuff, I can ignore more cover! Cool.Except for a little problem: I don't have Precise Shot. From what I can gather from IH, the Hunter can't even get Precise Shot until 4th+ level. The Archer does have Precise Shot, though, and so at least I'm making the combat better for one other person. Everyone else is in melee, and that cover ability is oh-so-important. Not.I think the Hunter gets really effective from levels 4 onward, but from my experiences, I am beginning to think Iron Heroes is a really, really badly developed game. That the designer of Iron Heroes is the lead developer of D&D 4e worries me.Perhaps the Hunter has good skills? Well, they're not bad. Only problem is this: the Rogue/Thief of the group had better. Not only more skill points, but in Iron Heroes, that class has max ranks at level 1 of 6 rather than 4. Oh, and it has Sneak Attack... so it's already more effective in combat than I was. I probably could have been in heavier armour... but no shield.I don't actually think Iron Heroes is a bad game. It has plenty of fans, and looking at what the other PCs could do... fantastic! However, any RPG needs to demonstrate part of what makes it good from the beginning. Most people will begin at 1st level, and if one of the classes is a lot weaker than everything else... the poor people who play that class may end up going somewhere else for their entertainment.My first real experience of the AD&D game was playing a 1st-level magic-user with the shocking grasp spell as my only spell. Tell me again why my character was along? Cheers!</blockquote>

Verification