Iron Heroes...what's your opinion?

[Illvillainy]

I feel underwhelmed by IH. Then again, I was by AE too. I'm begining to feel that Malhavoc and I have totally different approaches to game design.

Yeah, that's it. The BoVD was subpar in my opinion too. Sorry Monte and co. We're not really meant to be together.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

No apologies necessary.

I'm not sure what you mean by "modular and grainy" but the difference for me is that Conan has a purpose. Again, I'm still not sure what IH's purpose is.

I lost you after the first sentence so I will address that. While I agree IH is not advertised as setting-specific, I feel that's one of the problems. The ruleset is VERY specific to something, the reader just doesn't know what. Honestly, as a DM, I wouldn't really know how to run an IH game. The mechanics are clear and precise but what do you do with them in an actual campaign?

You say IH is a generic system and I say it's not. The ruleset is too hard-coded to be generic. It's even more inflexible than standard D&D. If you want a generic system, you have to go the other way.

Now, if you want to discuss a ruleset that is completely non-specific (and yes, I'm going to bring into this thread), I have to direct your attention to Grim Tales. GT is a completely generic system. The difference with GT is that is truely allows you to use it for any setting that you can imagine. And the cool thing about GT is that if you give it to 10 different people, each person will be inspired to create 10 different settings just by reading the mechanics.

I don't get that feeling from IH. Conan knows what it wants to be, it tells the reader what it is, and it delivers. Grim Tales know what it is and lets the reader decide what to make of it. I don't think IH does any of that.

Hmm, I'm sorry I lost you where I did.

I only think IH is generic in the sense that it evokes a specific Genre, and I do think it's a big G genre not a little g genre in the sense of how much it can incorporate from specific mediums. Something more along the lines of prosody than plot.

In terms of the GT comparison, I think if you look at the reception that IH is getting you can see how much setting based creativity the mechanics alone element of IH inspires. So from a reception standpoint I think IH is doing fine. On the flip side I'm certain if you showed GT to twenty different people there would be someone who wouldn't 'get' it and would be inspired to do nothing at all. So I'd argue from your comparison that they certainly seem to be on the same page in terms of audience guidance, though I don't know for certain given my very limited experience of Grim Tales.

Reading your response I am struck by how much my experience of Conan is pushing my argument in this debate. I just really had the impression that Conan was telling me it was doing something, doing a little bit of something in that regard, and then contradicting itself later. Two mechanical examples: Armor as DR and Multiple Attackers. Armor as DR in Conan drove me mad. The game was very proud of it as a feature and it was integrated into everything, but then it got ridiculous. Armor as DR was too static and so the game evolved two distinct methods for ignoring Armor as DR. And the complexity of the defense systems of the game just seemed to snowball from there with dodging and parrying becoming two distinct mechanics that were initially too distinct and then just seemed to become a means of inflicting pain on confused players. Multiple attackers was a simpler annoyance in that it was billed as a huge component of a gritty game and then only delivered a potential +5 bonus to attack, excepting of course a swarm of tiny creatures who were now insanely mighty. So in that sense I think my argument and, indeed, my very like for IH is that for the most part I feel it actually delivered. And in that sense I meant very literally that IH provided a better Conan than Conan OGL did, though don't get me wrong there were a number of things that Conan OGL did dead right.

If I hadn't been dissatisfied with the prior Heroic Fantasy systems out there I don't know that I'd be as into this. That said I don't think that dissatisfaction rested entirely on the mechanical elements of the game. I've been needing something with the genre understanding that IH has for some time. A sort of Feng Shui, there's my comparison, for DnD both in the sense of 'furious action' and in the sense of a genre hopping fusion machine.

That said, I'm a little uncertain as to how this ruleset is more hard-coded than DnD.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Regardless of the means in which they acheive it, the "goal" of each system is the same: to allow character to recover more quickly between battles in a setting in which magical healing is rare or non-existant. Yes, the VP/WP system does have a higher degree of lethality built-in (which I prefer, but that's neither here nor there in this thread) but I feel the mechanics are much cleaner.

How?

This is sort of a cognitive dissonance issue for me. I don't know how you could get messier than VP/WP.*


*ok, I do, but among the legitimate means of accomplishing this VP/WP seems distinctly silly and harder to explain.

 

[Odhanan]

*ok, I do, but among the legitimate means of accomplishing this VP/WP seems distinctly silly and harder to explain.

It is, I can say it. I was using VP/WP in my campaign, and the double standard just confused the players to no end. What it was doing was just satisfying a secret wish of mine to come back to a "believable" health system. And I was wrong.

As for Grim Tales and other stuff people call "low magic", "realistic" or whatever: I'm sick and tired of games that propose daaark environments and repeat the words "grim" and "gritty" mechanically in the text, without any other elements that make you feel the grim. Examples: Midnight, Warhammer2. I'm tired of despair and shakespearian woe in role-playing games products. This is an extreme, just like others fall in the opposite, namely fake, over-the-top fantasies (don't start me on the topic of elves in D&D settings...).

Anyway, the point I'm trying to reach is that IH adresses a precise, told G Genre, like Dr. S was saying. This Genre is, to put it simply, and for a lack of a better word, Sword and Sorcery.

You know, *THE* Sword and Sorcery of the Grey Mouser and Conan with a strong emphasis on "sword". *THE* Sword and Sorcery where characters aren't all-knowing wizards but sellswords using their wits and daring to outplay their opponents. The guys swinging on the chandelier of the tavern to crash on the guards of the Cardinal. Yeah, these guys with the funny hats and needle-blades.

I mean, I'm trying to understand GlassJaw, but I don't get what you're seeing as vague in IH (I'll let the "insulting" RP chapter aside on this one: if you're an advanced roleplayer, you won't be offended at being reminded of some key elements about the game from time to time).

I see Conan RPG as a game that feels a lot like various OGL games: games taking bits and pieces from the SRD, modifying this or that, and offering all these houserules in a single volume. There's a lack of coherence in the end.

I wouldn't say that for IH.

the cool thing about GT is that if you give it to 10 different people, each person will be inspired to create 10 different settings just by reading the mechanics.

Seriously, I'm glad for the fans of GT. I can't say that I know GT enough. What I can tell you, however, is that I already know a lot of fans of IH feeling this exact same thing you describe here. And I'm among them. So I guess it's "to each their own," don't you think?

 

[GlassJaw]

So I guess it's "to each their own," don't you think?

That's a little convenient but does strike true. By the nature of the posts in this thread (which are starting to go around in circles IMO and I'm losing interest to respond to them), I think we are getting at at underlying difference in style.

In Illvillainy's short but spot-on post, he says,

I'm begining to feel that Malhavoc and I have totally different approaches to game design.

and

Sorry Monte and co. We're not really meant to be together.

I wouldn't go so far to say you are either with Monte or you're against him, but I think most people will admit there is a distinctive style throughout most of the Malhavoc products. Now I know Monte didn't write IH but I think the style comes through.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I generally like Malhavoc's stuff overall but it certainly isn't my preferred style. They are usually very heavy on the mechanics and character options and very high-fantasy. I also get the feeling with some Malhavoc products that the actual abilities and options are the stars of the show, not the story or characters themselves. IH certainly has these elements.

How these elements are perceived, however (be it with IH, Grim Tales, Conan, whatever), is where the reader's personal opinion takes over. I "get" Grim Tales and Conan; I didn't really "get" IH. But I'm ok with that.

 

[Odhanan]

I wouldn't go so far to say you are either with Monte or you're against him, but I think most people will admit there is a distinctive style throughout most of the Malhavoc products. Now I know Monte didn't write IH but I think the style comes through.

I agree on this. Absolutely, there is a distinctive feel that people either like or don't. Much like Planescape "back in the day", when I think about it.

I also get the feeling with some Malhavoc products that the actual abilities and options are the stars of the show, not the story or characters themselves. IH certainly has these elements.

I see what you mean, but don't see it the same way. For me, options and abilities help you get your original character concept to show through game mechanics. That is, mechanics support your ideas instead of hindering them. They add up instead of being deemed opponents in the designer's mind. At least, that's how I feel about this, and that's a big part of what I like about Malhavoc Press.

 

[ThirdWizard]

They are usually very heavy on the mechanics and character options and very high-fantasy. I also get the feeling with some Malhavoc products that the actual abilities and options are the stars of the show, not the story or characters themselves. IH certainly has these elements.

Huh... you seem to be saying that more options means less roleplaying and less options means more roleplaying, which I can't help but find to be silly. Just because you're getting extra feats and skills doesn't mean that it becomes any harder to flesh out a character. Indeed, the first thing to do when building a character in IH is to figure out what kind of character you want to play, not in mechanical terms, but in roleplaying terms.


Grim Tales and Conan are completely different games than IH, though. Perhaps you are looking for something similar? I know lots of people were. In any case, IH is basically a D&D game without magical items. There's no big thing to it beyond that, and trying to look deeper is only going to leave you wanting. No big secret. Just High Fantasy with Sword and Sworcery, and Medium Magic to Low Magic depending on the DM and game.

 

[Sadrik]

IH is about having characters without the need to have magic items and still be able to go against the appropriate CR. You decide if they succeeded or failed.

Of course there are a few things thrown in too:
Character Traits
Token pools to power abilities
Skill Groups
Magic system (that is almost excellent)
Feat system (masteries)

Overall, I rate it an 8 or 9 out of 10.

 

[GlassJaw]

Huh... you seem to be saying that more options means less roleplaying and less options means more roleplaying, which I can't help but find to be silly. Just because you're getting extra feats and skills doesn't mean that it becomes any harder to flesh out a character. Indeed, the first thing to do when building a character in IH is to figure out what kind of character you want to play, not in mechanical terms, but in roleplaying terms.

Seem to be and what I actually said are two different things. More options = less role-playing is silly, and again, that's not what I said. To clarify, it's my opinion that when I read a Malhavoc product, the emphasis is on the new mechanics and character options, not necessarily the fluff or story behind them.

For example, I like AU/AE but the plethora of character options seems to be attraction moreso than the campaign or story that binds them together. With AU/AE, and IH for that matter, I think it's very important that the DM clearly set the stage for the campaign background. Otherwise, I think it could be easy for the game to dissolve into just a bunch of rules and mechanics. With Conan, much of the background and story is already done for you. With GT, nothing is done for you so the GM has to flesh it all out. With AU/AE and IH, the illusion of a campaign setting is there but it's not clearly defined.

Grim Tales and Conan are completely different games than IH, though. Perhaps you are looking for something similar?

Perhaps on some level I was. And I could be guilty of having some preconceived notion of what it was going to be even though I tried to stay as impartial as I could be while I read it. I still think I was but it's tough to not have some personal opinion spillover into everything you read.

 

[GlassJaw]

I see what you mean, but don't see it the same way. For me, options and abilities help you get your original character concept to show through game mechanics. That is, mechanics support your ideas instead of hindering them. They add up instead of being deemed opponents in the designer's mind. At least, that's how I feel about this, and that's a big part of what I like about Malhavoc Press.

Another excellent example of different play styles. I definitely think a book chock full of options and abilities can get in the way of creative thought. Instead of creating a cool character concept, some players get their heads stuck in the books and analyze ever ability combination. That's why I like Grim Tales so much. It's completely generic so I can use the rules to flesh out my concept, not the other way around.

Once again, different strokes (this seems to be a recurring theme in this thread ).