Iron Heroes...is it really different from core D&D?

[iwatt]

Also a.k.a. Capellan, as it happens.

Sneaky sneaky. All these people with alternate identities, and I'm simply iwatt werever I go.

And I'm waiting with bated breath for Blood Storm.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I understand that Attacks of Opportunity work somewhat differently in IH. How do they work?

Thanks,
Flynn

The D&D rules are replaced with a pretty simple pair of rules:

Movement: Every character has a threat allowance equal to 1/4 its speed (adjusted for armor, terrain, etc.; minimum 5'). You can move up to your threat allowance through a threatened area without provoking a movement-based AoO. If you move more than your threat allowance, you provoke an AoO.

Other Actions: If you take any standard or full-round action other than a melee attack while within a threatened area, you provoke an AoO. "Melee attack," in this case, includes charging, feinting, full attacking, and total defense. (You also do not provoke AoOs for using aid another; this is a special exemption.)

I must say that I don't use the IH movement-based AoO rules; I prefer the D&D rule of "exiting an opponent's threatened square provokes an AoO, unless you use the one-square step or withdraw actions." It's too easy for folks to dance around their enemies otherwise, IMHO.

 

[Capellan]

I must say that I don't use the IH movement-based AoO rules; I prefer the D&D rule of "exiting an opponent's threatened square provokes an AoO, unless you use the one-square step or withdraw actions." It's too easy for folks to dance around their enemies otherwise, IMHO.

I think that making it easier to move around your foes was actually the point of the IH changes. It's part of the game's theme of "make doing something other than a full attack worthwhile"

An equally important change to AoOs is that they are provoked by entering a square, not exiting it. It's thus perfectly OK in IH to make an attack, then move away from your opponent, without suffering an AoO for doing it, since you never enter a square they threaten (unless of course they have 10ft+ reach, and even then you might be able to do it, due to the different way reach works in IH, and your increased movement allowance before provoking an AoO).

 

[ruleslawyer]

Oh, I understood that, Adam. I personally have found that the IH AoO rules go a bit too far for my tastes. My major complaint is that the ability to attack + move or close within 10' reach makes things like the harrier's Combat Mobility class feature pretty meaningless; since you'll never provoke, why even bother having an AC bonus against AoOs?

I imagine the IH rule works fine for most; I just want a somewhat tougher set of consequences for moving into and out of combat in order to encourage more careful tactics.

 

[iwatt]

Oh, I understood that, Adam. I personally have found that the IH AoO rules go a bit too far for my tastes. My major complaint is that the ability to attack + move or close within 10' reach makes things like the harrier's Combat Mobility class feature pretty meaningless; since you'll never provoke, why even bother having an AC bonus against AoOs?

You're right, but I think you're taking an extreme example (1 opponent). If you mix things up with more than 3 opponents, the amount threatened squares become an issue.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Or opponents with great reach. Ah hydras, how much fun you can be.

 

[Gundark]

Is IH easier to run than core D&D? I'm guess yes due to lack of magic (for the most part)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Is IH easier to run than core D&D? I'm guess yes due to lack of magic (for the most part)

Because of that, and because the Mastering Iron Heroes book offers easy-to-use villain classes.

Still, there are some things that might make it more complicated again - the rules for zones etc.pp. are probably work - but they are also worth it. I have no experience with it yet, so maybe others can chime in about that.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Is IH easier to run than core D&D?

A little bit. On the one hand, PCs don't have reliable magic to provide the 'standard solution' to various challenges and problems, and so you have to remember to a) provide alternate solutions b) provide ways around the challenge or c) have players clever and inventive enough to see a solution even when there isn't supposed to be one.
On the other hand, PCs don't have as many crazy abilities that bring the game to a halt while you puzzle out how to salvage your plot (if it can be salvaged at all). They have crazy abilities and can still break your plot, but most of the things they can do at 20th level could also be done at 1st level, they just couldn't be done as well.

Villain classes make it *much* easier to run nasty villains. Mastering Iron Heroes and the Iron Heroes Beastiary have six villain classes that cover challenge ratings from 1 to 20 and allow the villain to be fully generated in less than ten minutes. Fun, effective and easy to run while being darn cool.

Keep in mind that IH encourages and rewards flexible and creative choices in battle. The GM must be willing to go along with any cool ideas the players have, and able to quickly determine appropriate checks for what they attempt to do. This is far more common in IH than in D&D, so GMs need to be more flexible and creative for the small scale in IH, though they generally need to be less so on the larger scale since no one can wish half the enemy out of existence.

 

[DonTadow]

I"m not sure IH is neccessary a low magic type system. It is a high adventure type system which is what I call it. The Iron Heroes system comes with a arcanist class that can do some really diverse things. I've meshed the EOM: Mystic Earth with the Spellweaver PDF to produce a low magic class that has traditions of different types of mages including a cleric

The system works out well with the mage classes. I think the big thing about IH is that it eliminates the dependancy on magical weapons and items. Mages and magic are just as powerful as a warrior or fighter.