Iron Lore Excerpts

[Felon]

Character traits sneak peak:
http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_IL_excerpt1

Hunter class sneak peak:
http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_IL_excerpt2

Without getting bogged down in the various arguements going on in the other Iron Lore threads, I wanted to make some observations on these excerpts (and then we get to have all-new arguements wheee!). Heck, maybe Mike will stop by and take some notes.

Child of Faith Trait
I was surprised to see the Child of Faith feat grants abilities that have 1/day uses. The x/day mechanic is one thing I'd like to see gone from d20, if for no other reason is that it perpetuates the notion that such abilities can be accurately gauged and balanced based on the designers' assumptions of how many times characters will be engaged in combat before they rest. I've actually seen 3e designer comments where they'd said "in an average day, a party of X size and Y level can expect to have between 3-5 encounters". I think that's wildly presumptuous.

By way of example, I've been in a campaign where the combined factors of a large group and the DM's predilection for grandiose, skin-of-your-teeth, winner-take-all battles resulted consistently in the party having only one fight a night, so more than 1/day was pointless. OTOH, as a DM I like to have lots of small skirmishes on missions with tight deadlines that force characters to contemplate the depletion of resources carefully. And yet another DM I know lets the party explore at their own pace, so people rest whenever they feel like it and the concept of 4/day vs. 3/day is tough to gauge.

This is why I liked the token idea. It's a superior mechanic because the replenishment of tokens is in the players' hands.

City Rat trait
The City Rat's ability to track down "dealers and informants" seems pretty vaguely described. Moreover, is this intended to compliment or supplant Knowledge (local)?

OTOH, the mechanic for using Survival to track down items has a specific formula that I think is a little unworkable. A 1000 gp item has a reasonable DC of 20, while a 2000 gp item requires a DC 40 check. Now IL may well have a different scheme for pricing than D&D, where the discrepency of 1000 gp is accurately represented by a 20 DC gulf, but it seems dubious. Perhaps characters have significant options for adding on skill enhancers, so a 40 DC check isn't as outrageously high as it is in D&D.

The "Face in the Crowd" ability is interesting. I do hope the Disguise skill is switched to being INT-based (complimented by CHA-based Bluff skill). People notice high CHA characters; it shouldn't aid characters in escaping notice.

Tall trait
Strictly personal opinion here, but allowing a character to threaten one additional square seems cumbersome, and I think it will lead to some awkward situations. D20 combat operates under the notion that during any given round a creature is paying attention to their surroundings from multiple directions at once--this is why we haven't seen mechanics like this before.

Hunter Hit Die
The Hunter hit die/level is listed as 1d4+4. Looks like a good compromise between rolling and taking an average number. 1d4+4 generates an average of 6.5, which is what a d12 generates on average (all of this before CON modifiers). I wonder how that number stacks up to the other classes?

Hunter Defense Bonus
The Hunter receives a defense bonus that tops out at +17, coming very close to his BAB. Others have followed IL more closely than me, so does anybody know if armor still provides any AC benefits, or is entirely DR? One of d20's core concepts is that hits should tend to exceed misses, and as levels progress the ratio increases in favor of hits, thereby making HP even more vital.

EDIT--Feel free to insert your own observations!

 

[A'koss]

Child of Faith Trait
I was surprised to see the Child of Faith feat grants abilities that have 1/day uses. The x/day mechanic is one thing I'd like to see gone from d20, if for no other reason is that it perpetuates the notion that such abilities can be accurately gauged and balanced based on the designers' assumptions of how many times characters will be engaged in combat before they rest.

...

This is why I liked the token idea. It's a superior mechanic because the replenishment of tokens is in the players' hands.

Agreed. If there was any hope of revising the x/day abilities I think the Token Mechanic is the way to go. Personally I'd like to see only two kinds of abilities in IL - those you can use at will and those that rely on Tokens.

Tall trait

Strictly personal opinion here, but allowing a character to threaten one additional square seems cumbersome, and I think it will lead to some awkward situations. D20 combat operates under the notion that during any given round a creature is paying attention to their surroundings from multiple directions at once--this is why we haven't seen mechanics like this before, all.

Actually, I quite like the Tall trait. On the game board, you just point your mini in the direction of the reach square - I don't see that being a big deal in play at all. After all, we had "facing" for years in D&D (front/flank/rear/head ACs) and this is still orders of magnitude more simple.

Hunter Hit Die

The Hunter hit die/level is listed as 1d4+4. Looks like a good compromise between rolling and taking an average number. 1d4+4 generates an average of 6.5, which is what a d12 generates on average (all of this before CON modifiers). I wonder how that number stacks up to the other classes?

Any bet that Barbarians will be d6+6, with maybe 1d5+5 classes thrown in for good measure... I agree it's a good compromise, I just hope the range between the classes doesn't end up too disparate (which creates problems at higher levels).

Hunter Defense Bonus

The Hunter receives a defense bonus that tops out at +17, coming very close to his BAB. Others have followed IL more closely than me, so does anybody know what if armor still provides any AC benefits, or is entirely DR? One of d20's core concepts is that hits should tend to exceed misses, and as levels progress the ratio increases in favor of hits, thereby making HP even more vital.

From what I've read, it seems to suggest that armor is DR only. I also wanted to point out that, if the hunter is any indication, it looks like there will many opportunities for situational bonuses to attack rolls (and defense for that matter). And I suspect that the hunter's DB will be greater than characters who are geared more towards heavier armor. I'm willing to bet the Armiger's DB won't look as pretty, but the Harrier may be higher yet based on his description.

Cheers!

 

[Andor]

Child of Faith Trait
I was surprised to see the Child of Faith feat grants abilities that have 1/day uses. The x/day mechanic is one thing I'd like to see gone from d20, if for no other reason is that it perpetuates the notion that such abilities can be accurately gauged and balanced based on the designers' assumptions of how many times characters will be engaged in combat before they rest. I've actually seen 3e designer comments where they'd said "in average night, a party of X level can expect to have Y encounters". I think that's wildly inaccurate.

By way of example, I've been in a campaign where the combined factors of a large group and the DM's predilection for grandiose, skin-of-your-teeth, winner-take-all battles resulted consistently in the party having only one fight a night, so more than 1/day was pointless. OTOH, as a DM I like to have lots of small skirmishes on missions with tight deadlines that force characters to contemplate the depletion of resources carefully. And yet another DM I know lets the party explore at their own pace, so people rest whenever they feel like it and the concept of 4/day vs. 3/day is tough to gauge.

Yah. I'm not a big fan of 1/day abilities either. OTOH the fact that we've only seen one so far hopefully indicates they are few and far between in Iron Lore. They are all over the bloody place in UA, pretty much my biggest problem with that book, aside from the poor editing/planning on the champions.

I'm eager to see more about the token system. I may use goldfish for tokens. Yum!

 

[Baron Opal]

I imagine that the Hunter would have a 1d8 HD in any other flavor d20. To promote some variability hit points may be determined in IL by 1d4+X, where X = the remainder of the HD.

1d4 --> Monte doesn't do d4's (See Arcana Evolved)
1d6 --> 1d4+2
1d8 --> 1d4+4
1d12 --> 1d4+8

Of course, this is just a guess.

Baron Opal

 

[Felon]

Yah. I'm not a big fan of 1/day abilities either. OTOH the fact that we've only seen one so far hopefully indicates they are few and far between in Iron Lore. They are all over the bloody place in UA, pretty much my biggest problem with that book, aside from the poor editing/planning on the champions.

Yep, just the very notion that, no matter what the conditions, characters of heroic proportions must find a means to regularly stop and get 8 full hours of rest is bothersome on face value. Can you imagine if real-world soldiers in combat zones needed to rest that much constantly? Nobody would ever successfully sustain an invasion.

I've mentioned this before in other threads, and it usually prompts all sort of dismissals from folks mentioning how spells like Leomund's Tiny Hut and Mordenkanen's Mansion make rest stops simple matters (which I always found rather obtuse responses because they really miss my entire point in a big way). However, in Iron Lore characters won't even have those spells to fall back on. They may not be able to find a comfy spot to be sitting ducks in for 1/3 of a day. Folks, eight hours is a lot of sleep.

 

[Felon]

Actually, I quite like the Tall trait. On the game board, you just point your mini in the direction of the reach square - I don't see that being a big deal in play at all. After all, we had "facing" for years in D&D (front/flank/rear/head ACs) and this is still orders of magnitude more simple.

We had facing back when the game wasn't oriented around miniatures, squares, reach, and attacks-of-opportunity. I think this way of handling tall is pretty inelegant. What exactly does that even represent? The tall man leaning over? Can an opponent see what square Angus Grim is threatening with 5 foot long arms, and just move around it? I'd rather they let a tall character attack out to 10 feet (in all directions) at a penalty on his turn, and without actually threatening those squares. There's precedent for being able to attack someone without threatening the square they're in (e.g. whips).

From what I've read, it seems to suggest that armor is DR only. I also wanted to point out that, if the hunter is any indication, it looks like there will many opportunities for situational bonuses to attack rolls (and defense for that matter). And I suspect that the hunter's DB will be greater than characters who are geared more towards heavier armor. I'm willing to bet the Armiger's DB won't look as pretty, but the Harrier may be higher yet based on his description.

I just hope things are balanced so that misses don't exceed hits. That's boring gameplay there.

 

[Gez]

I was surprised to see the Child of Faith feat grants abilities that have 1/day uses. The x/day mechanic is one thing I'd like to see gone from d20, if for no other reason is that it perpetuates the notion that such abilities can be accurately gauged and balanced based on the designers' assumptions of how many times characters will be engaged in combat before they rest. I've actually seen 3e designer comments where they'd said "in average night, a party of X level can expect to have Y encounters". I think that's wildly inaccurate.

True, but designers love them. That's why D&D magic is spell-slot based. That's why Arcana Evolved introduced combat rites.

Tall trait
Strictly personal opinion here, but allowing a character to threaten one additional square seems cumbersome, and I think it will lead to some awkward situations.

Agreement.

Hunter Hit Die
The Hunter hit die/level is listed as 1d4+4. Looks like a good compromise between rolling and taking an average number. 1d4+4 generates an average of 6.5, which is what a d12 generates on average (all of this before CON modifiers). I wonder how that number stacks up to the other classes?

I wonder if this will mean anything for the IL bestiary...

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I just hope things are balanced so that misses don't exceed hits. That's boring gameplay there.

Not if you describe misses in a fun way. You didn't miss, your opponent brought his shield to bear just quick enough to turn aside your blow. The enemy didn't miss you, you spun to one side and his overhand swing crashed to the floor, or his dagger flashed towards your eyes, but your pantherish reflexes were sufficient to the task of deflecting his blade with your own.

Personally, I think the sheer number of hits in standard D&D is the biggest problem I have with getting deep into the game. When I play a melee character, I feel like the bloody Black Knight in Monty Python's In search of the Holy Grail.

 

[Andre]

x/day abilities:

The only problem with using tokens is that they are replenished with each encounter. Making the ability cost a lot of tokens limits it to high-level characters only. Making it cost very few tokens means it will be used in every encounter (if it's really useful). You almost need another type of token (hero points?) that are replenishable at a cost. Or include something else, such as a monetary cost, to discourage using the ability all the time.

Tall trait

To each his own, but as soon as I saw this, I knew I would house rule it out. Not really necessary, a bit clumsy in application. I just don't like it and frankly I doubt any player would even notice if it wasn't available.

Hit Dice/Hit Points

I think I like this a lot. I'll wait to see the full implementation, but anything that reduces the randomness in such a basic part of gameplay is, IMO, a good thing.

Defense Bonus

Again, I'll have to wait and see how everything fits before forming a final opinion. That said, I like the idea of armor as DR, so I'm optimistic.

To add one other topic to the discussion, was anyone else concerned at the complexity of the Hunter class in actual play? The number of abilities, the management of the token pool, the conditional nature of the bonuses, the short-term nature of the bonuses - all this adds up to a very complex game session, IMO. Especially at high levels, I can see a player using one or more reference charts just to play the character at minimal effectiveness.

I really hope the Hunter is not typical of the complexity of the rest of the classes and rules in IL.

 

[A'koss]

We had facing back when the game wasn't oriented around miniatures, squares, reach, and attacks-of-opportunity. I think this way of handling tall is pretty inelegant. What exactly does that even represent? The tall man leaning over? Can an opponent see what square Angus Grim is threatening with 5 foot long arms, and just move around it? I'd rather they let a tall character attack out to 10 feet (in all directions) at a penalty on his turn, and without actually threatening those squares.

The way I see tall working is that it is as far as the character can strain to hit and not lose his balance (which is why he focuses on just one square). However, your last idea is pretty clever - penalty to hit/not actually threatening the squares... I think that's quite workable too. The only hiccup might be with some of the challenges (if they follow the Book of Iron Might) that allow area attacks (or similar style abilities). It might be too good a perk when taking the big picture in consideration.

I just hope things are balanced so that misses don't exceed hits. That's boring gameplay there.

There's a tricky balance there and the higher level concerns Canis points out are valid. It's a much larger discussion though when you start taking about the highly initiative dependent, swift (in rounds) and brutal battles in 3e.

x/day abilities:

The only problem with using tokens is that they are replenished with each encounter. Making the ability cost a lot of tokens limits it to high-level characters only. Making it cost very few tokens means it will be used in every encounter (if it's really useful).

I still think they should be folded into the Token mechanic and bring in yet another way to resolve them. You just have to balance the perk against the number of times it can be used like any other Token ability or a sufficient drawback (eg. weakened - temp. ability damage) to using it if allowed all the time.

To add one other topic to the discussion, was anyone else concerned at the complexity of the Hunter class in actual play? The number of abilities, the management of the token pool, the conditional nature of the bonuses, the short-term nature of the bonuses - all this adds up to a very complex game session, IMO. Especially at high levels, I can see a player using one or more reference charts just to play the character at minimal effectiveness.

I think it's more due to the fact that it is a greater departure from the d20 norm than we're used to. The token pools seem pretty small though and I suspect most will burn them on a single ability in the encounter. If you think about it, the Hunter doesn't have anywhere near the options a spellcaster or even a monk has. The Hunter has 10 unique abilities with the rest being improvements on earlier ones. In an actual encounter you'll break it down to a even smaller number of prudent choices. Personally, I love the flexibility but I'm sure it will take time to figure out how to gel it all together.

Cheers!