D&D 4E Iron Heroes for 4e?

[vagabundo]

I was just thinking about this today. I would love to see some of the classes converted. A mashup of IH and 4e for a low magic-lovecraftian setting.

I really like the arcanist and the whole magic items are dangerous.

 

[Betote]

As Mastering IH indicates, you can still have magic items; it's just that there aren't that many of them, they're not built into expected character power, and they come with drawbacks. None of that sounds too different from 4e's core assumptions.

Except that Mearls himself has said several times that, in 4E, you're expected to have certain magic items at certain levels, and there isn't any drawback on the few magic item descriptions we've been able to see.

 

[Yair]

I'm also interested in an OGL hybrid. I like the concept of IH a lot, but never got a chance to play it. My current plan is to look at what 4E looks like, and then cook a hybrid rules system that will combine 3.5e, IH, 4e, and probably stuff like SAGA into my own preferrable brew. Not sure if it would be OGL, though - I doubt that would be possible. It isn't possible to even have anything really derivative of IH as OGL, except for the owners, to beging with - piling on all that extra 4e stuff and so on would really push things over the pale.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Except that Mearls himself has said several times that, in 4E, you're expected to have certain magic items at certain levels, and there isn't any drawback on the few magic item descriptions we've been able to see.

Well calculating in the actual numerical benefit from the Magic Items is essentially what IH did with 3E and since 4E seems to really be focused on the numeric development I imagine it's even easier to do with the new system.

Then you can throw in drawbacks for the magic items you do still feel like using.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Well calculating in the actual numerical benefit from the Magic Items is essentially what IH did with 3E and since 4E seems to really be focused on the numeric development I imagine it's even easier to do with the new system.

Then you can throw in drawbacks for the magic items you do still feel like using.

I think this might also be the reason why it's less needed to create a replacement/alternate PHB. I don't really see a big market for a game that increases the magical item dependency to the levels of 3E.

If you want to create an Iron Heroes style game, you just need to add what you want to add (new classes, the +1 to attacks/defenses per 4 levels) and remove elements you don't want (+X magical swords, implements, armor and slots, and any class not appropriate for your game).

This doesn't require a new write-up of the core rules. (Such a write-up might sometimes be handy, but it's not required).

I suppose you only need to create new core rules is when you want a very low-powered game - which might include no class powers/maneuvers/spells at all. But this certainly wasn't a goal with Arcana Evolved or Iron Heroes, and I am certain a game like Conan wouldn't be hurt by that either. I don't know anything detailed on True20, Grim Tales or similar games, maybe they require going without powers?

 

[ruleslawyer]

Except that Mearls himself has said several times that, in 4E, you're expected to have certain magic items at certain levels, and there isn't any drawback on the few magic item descriptions we've been able to see.

What Dr. Strangemonkey said. The point to the drawbacks issue is that they exist to ensure that in IH, having magic items isn't much of a net power gain (no more than a level or so). Mearls has said that it will be possible to effect the same thing in 4e given about 30 minutes.

 

[ruleslawyer]

...the Thief (which is too Social-oriented for 4E, I think; but maybe the Rogue too depending on how the 4E social encounter rules work).

I have the feeling that the thief is perfectly doable with the proper selection of powers. He essentially functions as a nonmagical beguiler in IH, which strikes me as a role that almost certainly will be represented in 4e. I think the major issue is the lack of monopoly on, or facility for, any individual class emphasis on skills. If the skill monkey role is going away, then the IH thief's niche would either need to be recreated by rejiggering skills, or the thief's ability to leverage skills for greater advantage would need to be emphasized.

 

[Pbartender]

Except that Mearls himself has said several times that, in 4E, you're expected to have certain magic items at certain levels, and there isn't any drawback on the few magic item descriptions we've been able to see.

Wait.

He said that the characters are expected to have certain bonuses to specific stats (attack/damage, defenses/saves and AC) from magic items at certain levels. All other magic items are effectively irrelevant for determining what level of characters a monster would challenge.

Given that the formula for the assumed bonuses will be obvious, all you have to do is transfer the bonus granted from magic weapons/implements, cloaks/necklaces, and armor to the characters themselves.

For example... "Your characters are each favored by a god and have earned their blessings as heroic paragons of what each of those gods stand for. At level five and every fifth level thereafter, your characters gain an additional +1 bonus to attack and damage, saving throw defenses, and armor class. In addition, you may choose any one category -- attack and damage, saving throw defenses, or armor class -- to gain an additional +1 bonus."

Effectively, give the characters innate bonuses that give bonuses just like magic weapons/implements, cloaks/necklaces, and armor. Then, you can use the occasional and rare magic item to give truly interesting benefits and powers.

 

[Dausuul]

I think 4E *is* Iron Heroes.

WotC saw what Mearls dreamed up, while still sticking to most of the 3.5 conventions, and was impressed. Impressed enough that they hired him and handed him their baby.

I love Iron Heroes. But I don't think its worth updating... 4E is the update. It served its purpose, but game design has evolved from it. I think (as has already been stated) that 4E Iron Heroes is as simple as limiting PCs to human fighters, warlords, rangers, and rogues, and limiting their access to magic as well. Done!

I agree. If a newbie DM can strip magic items out of the game in 30 minutes, and the non-magic classes are redesigned to be fun and cool without needing magical support, then Iron Heroes becomes essentially a subset of D&D 4th Edition.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I have the feeling that the thief is perfectly doable with the proper selection of powers. He essentially functions as a nonmagical beguiler in IH, which strikes me as a role that almost certainly will be represented in 4e. I think the major issue is the lack of monopoly on, or facility for, any individual class emphasis on skills. If the skill monkey role is going away, then the IH thief's niche would either need to be recreated by rejiggering skills, or the thief's ability to leverage skills for greater advantage would need to be emphasized.

I'd take your second option by making him a Martial-Leader, but different from the Warlord (just like the Rogue and Ranger appear to be different kinds of Martial-Strikers). He fills the same Leader role as Warlords and Clerics (in his own way), and his at-will/p-e/p-d Powers are tied to high Skills.

I would not want to recreate the skill monkey niche for a while (until I think I can do it without FUBAR-ing the class balance assumptions). With the introduction of Powers, Skills really become an out of combat thing; so a Skill Monkey would dominate most non-combat encounters even more than he does in IH/3E.