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

[ValhallaGH]

(Although I am still mildly miffed at IH's somewhat . . . half-baked nature. There's so much good stuff in there, it's a shame the game couldn't have gotten another round or two of design and editing to iron out the bugs.)

Blame WotC. If they hadn't offered Mike a job then he would have had the time to finish it properly. Instead he's over there in WotC's R&D branch.

Iwatt, you're welcome at my table whenever the opportunity arrises. (Which will be rare but the offer still stands.)

 

[iwatt]

Iwatt, you're welcome at my table whenever the opportunity arrises. (Which will be rare but the offer still stands.)

Thanx. Now I don't expect to be travelling much to the US in the near future, but were exactly are you located? I'm slightly south of the border

BTW, you're welcome in mine, if you don't mind playing in Spanglish and travelling to Chile.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Thanx. Now I don't expect to be travelling much to the US in the near future, but were exactly are you located? I'm slightly south of the border

Currently I'm south of the Mason-Dixon line and north of Florida.
Who knows how long that will last?

BTW, you're welcome in mine, if you don't mind playing in Spanglish and travelling to Chile.

Many thanks. Now I have an excuse to go to South America. All that remains is the means and the time.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Missing Mearls

Blame WotC. If they hadn't offered Mike a job then he would have had the time to finish it properly. Instead he's over there in WotC's R&D branch.

Yeah, what is in the future for IH? And what was supposed to be in the future before Mr. Mearls got a real job? Is Monte going to write something for it?

I own IH and IH Bestiary but haven't played it yet. Nonetheless, I like the look and feel of it--especially for tactical, combat-oriented players.

 

[iwatt]

Yeah, what is in the future for IH?

A new module by the msot excellent Adam Windsor, a.k.a. crowroadaw, author of Dark Harbor.

And what was supposed to be in the future before Mr. Mearls got a real job?

who knows?

Is Monte going to write something for it?

Doubt it. He's semi-retired and more intersted in Ptolud than in IH.

I own IH and IH Bestiary but haven't played it yet.

You don't have Mastering IH? It's pretty awesome (zones, villain classes, expanded rules).

 

[Capellan]

Yeah, what is in the future for IH?

All kinds of cool stuff.

A new module by Adam Windsor, a.k.a. crowroadaw, author of Dark Harbor.

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

I got the proofs of Blood Storm recently, so it should be pretty close to release.

The draft of my third IH book is done, and we're currently playtesting it. I'll be pitching ideas for my fourth book to the fine folks at Fiery Dragon sometime soon.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I think all three systems are excellent; it's just a matter of selecting the appropriate tool for one's intended game.

Seconded on all counts.

(Although I am still mildly miffed at IH's somewhat . . . half-baked nature. There's so much good stuff in there, it's a shame the game couldn't have gotten another round or two of design and editing to iron out the bugs.)

To be honest, at $15 for a core-book pdf and all the errata and house rules I need in the form of the (EXCELLENT) forums and Iron League, I'm just not bothered about the unfinished bits! I have to say that my current IH game has been easier to run out of the box than any (A)D&D game I've run; the major sticking point has been magic, which is relatively ancillary anyway (none of our current PCs has a spell-using class).

That said, I'd like a reprinted IH book with the classes fixed and about three magic-using class variants included (the fixed core arcanist, the True Sorcery arcanist, and something maybe written by Ryan Nock Elements-of-Magic style). But I'll take it as is!

 

[takyris]

I wonder if there is a theoretical research insitute for questions of game design. I know game theory is a part of mathematics, but this mainly is about finding optimal strategies or determine how people "play a game", not about how to design a game.

Nevertheless, look at a company that makes video games or new pen & paper systems. BioWare's Design department includes both writing (me) and things like combat (other guys), so I can walk down the hall and hear extremely spirited discussions exactly like the one you're suggesting -- new abilities versus improving abilities ("Does it make a new effect?"), how many things you get to improve per level (feats, skill points, etc.), all of that.

There's a popular theory about there being three different types of gamers, and it applies well to pen and paper games as well. (Although I agree fully with you that a CRPG isn't a pen & paper game -- you can make rules in a CRPG that would be far too complex to implement in a fun way in a pen & paper game, but you can't improvise a cocktail party without a live DM.) There are, in essence, three types of gamers (and yeah, it's likely something you've heard before):

- Story: This gamer plays for the story experience. He's motivated by completing plots. He enjoys new abilities that fit his character concept.
- Power: This gamer plays to achieve cool goals, like leveling to gain new abilities that increase his powers or stats.
- Exploration: This gamer plays to see what's out there in the world. He's motivated by the various possibilities that are out there, both in the story and in the customizng options for his class or equipment.

A Story guy really wants to learn the new spell because he just unlocked new spells by joining the Brotherhood of Light. A Power guy could care less about the new spells, because he'd rather spend his points improving the mana bolt he's got right now so that it can punch through solid steel with a standard blast. He'll take the new spell if the damage is better, or if it can eventually become better. The Exploration guy is wondering if dual-wielding a whip and a stiletto is really viable as a class concept, but is determined to see it through, because this is the seventh time he's played through the game, and this time it's no-magic and trying to get the support of the Underground Elven Alliance.

And a good game appeals to all three.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Nevertheless, look at a company that makes video games or new pen & paper systems. BioWare's Design department includes both writing (me) and things like combat (other guys), so I can walk down the hall and hear extremely spirited discussions exactly like the one you're suggesting -- new abilities versus improving abilities ("Does it make a new effect?"), how many things you get to improve per level (feats, skill points, etc.), all of that.

There's a popular theory about there being three different types of gamers, and it applies well to pen and paper games as well. (Although I agree fully with you that a CRPG isn't a pen & paper game -- you can make rules in a CRPG that would be far too complex to implement in a fun way in a pen & paper game, but you can't improvise a cocktail party without a live DM.) There are, in essence, three types of gamers (and yeah, it's likely something you've heard before):

- Story: This gamer plays for the story experience. He's motivated by completing plots. He enjoys new abilities that fit his character concept.
- Power: This gamer plays to achieve cool goals, like leveling to gain new abilities that increase his powers or stats.
- Exploration: This gamer plays to see what's out there in the world. He's motivated by the various possibilities that are out there, both in the story and in the customizng options for his class or equipment.

A Story guy really wants to learn the new spell because he just unlocked new spells by joining the Brotherhood of Light. A Power guy could care less about the new spells, because he'd rather spend his points improving the mana bolt he's got right now so that it can punch through solid steel with a standard blast. He'll take the new spell if the damage is better, or if it can eventually become better. The Exploration guy is wondering if dual-wielding a whip and a stiletto is really viable as a class concept, but is determined to see it through, because this is the seventh time he's played through the game, and this time it's no-magic and trying to get the support of the Underground Elven Alliance.

And a good game appeals to all three.

Yes, this makes sense, I think. But I would assume that every player has a bit of each type in himself.

These are exactly the kind of things that would need to be researched and especially written down, so it's not just implicit knowledge for a few experienced designers, but available to anyone. At least, that's what I would want from a "game design theory".

 

[Flynn]

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

Thanks,
Flynn