Iron Heroes or not- new game and purchase questions

[kobold]

I’m looking to start up a new game in a new town; I’ve not played in a looong time so it should be interesting.
For the game I’d like to eliminate alignments as well as do something new for me. Does Iron Heroes use alignments? If so, since it’s low magic how tough will it be to remove them? In D&D alignments run deep requiring a heavy overhaul of feats and spells to remove, a task I don’t really want to undertake.
I also want to keep things as simple as possible- and despite what people may think D&D combat is fairly complicated. Is Iron Heroes going to complicate combat to a point that the payoff isn’t there?
Any real experience in running an Iron Heroes game is appreciated.
Thanks,
Andy

 

[francisca]

I've played IH once, at Chicago Gameday (Buzz was the GM). It's a good solid game. Combat isn't any simpler than D&D 3.X, so don't assume you'll be gaining anything there.

However, unless there is already a thriving RPG scene, with people looking for something other than D&D, I think you stand a better chance attracting new players with stock 3.X, for better or worse.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Arcana Unearthed (or Arcana Evolved) doesn't have alignments, and is a complete system like unto D&D only.. a bit different. Just a thought, if that's one of your main concerns with D&D as is.

Iron Heroes (although bear in mind I haven't actually run it yet) complicates combat, mainly. It simplifies and streamlines a few other things, but if you don't like the tactical and numeric elements usually found in D&D combat, you will probably strongly dislike Iron Heroes combat, generally speaking. However, there are no alignments here either.

There are quite a few other low magic game options if that's what you're also definitely wanting.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I’m looking to start up a new game in a new town; I’ve not played in a looong time so it should be interesting.
For the game I’d like to eliminate alignments as well as do something new for me. Does Iron Heroes use alignments? If so, since it’s low magic how tough will it be to remove them? In D&D alignments run deep requiring a heavy overhaul of feats and spells to remove, a task I don’t really want to undertake.
I also want to keep things as simple as possible- and despite what people may think D&D combat is fairly complicated. Is Iron Heroes going to complicate combat to a point that the payoff isn’t there?
Any real experience in running an Iron Heroes game is appreciated.
Thanks,
Andy

Iron heroes doesn't use alignments.

Magic is rare and IH can be played without any magic using characters.

Combat is as complicated or easy as in regular D&D, but the system allows to enhance it further by using several options (some of them as class features).

I think the lack of magic can do a lot to make things easier, as there are fewer modifiers and special abilities to be taken into account.
But Iron Heroes is designed to make a interesting combat with a lot of options, which automatically leads to complex combat encounters if you really want to benefit of the IH advantages. (On the other hand, you rarely have to adjucate something on the fly, as everything is provided for you.)

I think IH is the wrong choice if you want a simplified combat game. But then, I don't know if there is any D&D game for that.
I'd recommend the new Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay for an overall simpler system.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I’m looking to start up a new game in a new town; I’ve not played in a looong time so it should be interesting.

Good luck! I do agree that your choice of game should depend on what people are interested in playing, since you'll want players first and foremost!

For the game I’d like to eliminate alignments as well as do something new for me. Does Iron Heroes use alignments?

IH does not use alignment.

I also want to keep things as simple as possible- and despite what people may think D&D combat is fairly complicated. Is Iron Heroes going to complicate combat to a point that the payoff isn’t there?

IH combat is fairly complicated, though not as bad in practice as I'd thought at first. The main issue is resolving the stunts and challenges that the game introduces, although of course, if you don't want to use stunts and challenges, you don't have to! They're combat options, so a player (or DM) has to decide to use them in order for them to be a part of combat.

However, if you find yourself wanting to use them, the following quicksheet makes it a breeze:

http://joasaerano.pbwiki.com/f/IH+Stunt+&+Challenge+Sheet.pdf

There's also a "simple stunts" system at the IH house rules wiki:

http://ironheroeshouserules.pbwiki.com/SimpleStunts

In truth, though, IH is easier, if anything, to run than D&D as a DM. You don't have to track treasure/magic item balance, there's very little PC spellcasting (in fact, several DMs seem to disallow PC spellcasting classes entirely), no situational buffs from magic, and best of all, IH comes with prepackaged "villain classes" which are simplified, prefab NPC archetypes (the dreaded sorcerer, the demonic knight, the champion, etc.) that are balanced by CR and come with a simplified, streamlined set of abilities that make them usable out of the box. So no more high-level, complicated NPCs to build!

Really, the only thing making IH more complicated from the DM's perspective are zones (specialized terrain with unique effects on combat, like ice bridges and avalanches and such; but you don't have to use those), having to learn about new PC classes (not so hard, since the classes are mostly fighter variants), and possibly having to do conversions for D&D adventures. This last strikes me as the most difficult, but OTOH, there's actually nothing wrong with just leaving D&D adventures as is; IH PCs are roughly as powerful as D&D PCs of equal level, and you can explain away NPC magic items as innate abilities, mystical gifts, or some such.

Any real experience in running an Iron Heroes game is appreciated.
Thanks,
Andy

I run an IH game set in Waterdeep (of the Forgotten Realms), and so far, I've been having a blast! I've actually (behind-the-curtain time here) spent virtually NO time building NPCs thus far (they're all either monsters or IH villain-classed NPCs) and my use of zones and such is largely invisible (I think) to my players (a slippery sewer ledge or two, an icy, muddy alley, a narrow, twisting rock passage, not much else). The stunt and challenge mechanics have wasted more game time than I'd like, but we've decided to simply declare combat actions in-character and either let me figure out the mechanics or keep it to 5 or fewer seconds with the quicksheet I linked to above.

However, if you want a simpler fantasy alternative, I might recommend Conan. It has a reasonably easy combat system that caps out in terms of complexity by about 10th level, meaning that the crazy-complicated high-level D&D combats aren't a factor. It has no alignments (replacing that system with a VERY Howard-esque honor and corruption setup) and it's fun.

 

[hong]

I think IH combat _can_ be more complicated and tactical than D&D, but it doesn't have to be. You can still do much the same things as you were doing before and get away with it, saving the more complex options for later. Here are the main complications compared to D&D combat:

- Various classes have token pools. Tokens are like power points/action points that you spend to activate special abilities. They're fairly easy to keep track of; if you can handle tracking hit points or psionics, tokens should be no different. I'd say they're also far easier to handle than the spell lists that D&D spellcasters have to juggle. If anything, a problem with IH is that (with notable exceptions) token abilities often _aren't_ that big a deal, so that what could be a point of difference between IH and D&D gets lost.

- You have things like challenges and stunts. Challenges are ways to trade off a penalty in one area (eg -6 to attacks) for a bonus in another area (eg +3 AC) -- fighting defensively in D&D is an example of a challenge. You only really need to use 2 challenges: defense (-4 atk/+2 AC) and damage (-4 atk/+2 dmg, or -6 atk/+6 dmg; like a poor man's Power Attack). Everything else is secondary.

- Stunts are a freeform way of using a skill roll to gain a bonus in combat. You don't have to use them; in fact much the time the bonus gained is small, so you're not losing much. They're best saved for the really big fights when people are desperate for every edge they can get. Or if you just want to show off.

- Zones are like codified ways to get the terrain involved in a fight. For example, a shaky rope bridge that requires Balance checks to get across, and makes fighting tricky, would be a zone. The main purpose of zones, AFAICT, is to emphasise the role of terrain and similar factors in making for interesting combats. They're nothing you couldn't have in D&D, but since they weren't emphasised much, a lot of D&D combats end up as white-map fights: the only terrain considerations are where the rooms join up, and how big a fireball you can fit into a space.

 

[boshuda]

Iron Heroes is fun

I've been playing in an Iron Heroes campaign for a while now, probably a few months every other week. I love it. I think it's actually less complex than DnD 3.5, probably because there's little/no magic. What magic we've encountered thus far has been magical abilities that a monster posesses. With cool stunts and actions built in to the rules and action zones spelled out your characters can do things you've never even dreamed of in DnD. But you, the player, decide what bonus/cost you want to your rolls while you do it. You don't have to keep track of various buff/curse spells.

We've been running an Age of Worms campaign on alternating weekends and more than once we've wished we were running Iron Heroes because some of the encounters just screamed out "This should be an Action Zone" or "this would be a great use of Stunts", and it just wouldn't have worked anywhere near as nicely under the DnD ruleset.

Swinging off of chandeliers: Iron Heroes says "Hell Yes", DnD says, "I guess so..."
Forcing said chandelier crashing to the ground: IH: "Just roll these skill checks", DnD: "Umm, no"
Sliding down a banister firing arrows at approaching enemies: IH "Balance check, please" DnD: "Sur -- Wait? You want to do WHAT?"
(That might be a bit of an exaggeration, but I hope you get my point)

Finally, the most imporant part of choosing a system is the level of fun (at least for me ), and Iron Heroes is most definitely fun.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Why not add the Action Zones (just a fancy name for terrain features) and Stunt rules to regular D&D?

Geoff.

 

[buzz]

Hey, francisca!

Anyway, kobold:

I would not say that combat in IH is more complicated than D&D. I would deifnitely say that combat in IH has far more options and is more interesting than D&D. The fact that PC magic is mostly non-existent removes a lot of the complicated aspects of D&D. The additional bits that IH tacks on simply bring IH back to D&D's general complexity level.

Also, a lot of the IH bits are player-controlled and initiated: token pools, challeneges, stunts, use of action zones. Ergo, the bookkeeping is being distributed around the table.

That said, if a general decrease in complexity and handling time is something you're looking for, and D&D is too complex for you, IH is likely not for you. If you want simple, you should be looking to other RPG systems.

Regardless, I consider IH to be one of the best d20 FRPGs yet created, and cannot reccomend it enough.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'll agree with the majority- IH is a good, solid game with lighter magic and more varied combat options than 3.X. It and Arcana Unearthed/Evolved are both excellent alternative takes on WotC's D20 FRPG, as is Midnight 2Ed.

I'll also agree with the assertion that you'll probably attract more players with 3.X than with any other game. However, if you're looking for gamers who prefer a particular niche, go with games that cater to that niche.