Iron Lore: Malhavoc's Surprise?

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

If you say so.

Again my utmost apologies for the accusations of churlishness.

 

[Andor]

Zorro's world (at least, the one most people have been exposed to) is ultimately a pretty harmless one. It's hard to cross-pollinate swashbuckling with grim-and-gritty.

To put it another way, the reason that Zorro doesn't "ring true," from a GnG perspective, isn't the "wahoo" of the action (although that's part of it), but rather the pervasive feeling that the protagonist (and many of his enemies) are in no real danger.

Zorro just doesn't drive his blade through the heart or throat of his enemies when pushing them down a flight of stairs or bowling them over like bowling pins will do.

Verisimilitude is broken specifically because Zorro would choose the more cinematic approach-- this in itself is not very realistic, even if the physical action is possible.

Soo... Zorro is not Grim and Gritty because the 'player' chooses to take non-lethal options even when lethality might serve him better? It seems to me (and if I'm wrong please tell me how) that what you define as grim and gritty is therefore a play style that requires both the DM and the players to cooperate to portray it properly.

If that's true then no system will ever be Grim and Gritty as long as the PCs have even a modicum of free will. You just need a system to get you to 'gritty' and you need to mix in the 'grim' yourself.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Having said that, I'd love it if some moderator would come in and tell us to stop talking about Wulf and get us talking about IL again.

lets stop talking about Wulf and start talking about Iron Lore again!

- it looks as if that Wulf/Strangemonkey/etc side trek has drawn to a natural close, so lets leave that one there and get back to Iron Lore expectations, unsupported theories, dissection of previews and all those other things that make it fun waiting for an interesting new product

Regards,

 

[Plane Sailing]

BTW, discussions that are more about "Grim n Gritty" rather than Iron Lore in particular should probably live in this Grim n Gritty thread.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=132151

Cheers

 

[Staffan]

It is why the Mike Mearls comment about first edition NPC classes went right over my head. Can someone explain that one a bit more?

It's a bit before my time too, but I'll give it a shot. In the days of yore, Dragon used to publish new classes every now and then. Most of these were supposedly NPC-only. I only have a vague recollection of them from a "Best of Dragon" collection we had in my old gaming club, but I do recall that they seemed a little more powerful than base classes.

 

[Staffan]

'The Iron Lore monk can walk on water because he has the right shoes and knows how to walk in them?'

Well, first of all there is no monk class in Iron Lore.

Second, I think this is where I have to quote Chiun, master of Sinanju: "You have to run very fast."

 

[Li Shenron]

I think the core idea of the Iron Lore player's handbook is very good.

However now that I have read the previews, I think it goes much further to what I would like to try (i.e. a system with little or no magic items).

The Iron Lore book seems to do an extensive work on combat which is great. But for instance I would not want to completely change the game by using entirely new classes, and the mechanics of tokens. I would rather keep using the core D&D classes and races (although I like the ideas about replacing races with treats a lot, I still have a setting here with more or less the traditional races), so I'll look forward to know how the Iron Lore "converts" the PHB classes when no magic equipment is available. If it does a good job, I'll definitely get this book

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Well, first of all there is no monk class in Iron Lore.

Second, I think this is where I have to quote Chiun, master of Sinanju: "You have to run very fast."

Any conversation that includes a quote by Chiun is one that has had some level of success.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

I think the core idea of the Iron Lore player's handbook is very good.

However now that I have read the previews, I think it goes much further to what I would like to try (i.e. a system with little or no magic items).

The Iron Lore book seems to do an extensive work on combat which is great. But for instance I would not want to completely change the game by using entirely new classes, and the mechanics of tokens. I would rather keep using the core D&D classes and races (although I like the ideas about replacing races with treats a lot, I still have a setting here with more or less the traditional races), so I'll look forward to know how the Iron Lore "converts" the PHB classes when no magic equipment is available. If it does a good job, I'll definitely get this book

The conversion rules are certainly something I'm looking forward to seeing. Among other things I'm curious about how essential tokens are to the rebalancing act.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

On a more specificly Iron Lore note:

We're arguing this on Monte's boards, but did anyone else see the reference to aliases for the Thief in the last playtester spotlight?

I like the idea I have of that dynamic, but I'm a little bit uncertain about what sort of dynamic there is.

Anyone seen any alias rules in other RPGs? The only ones I'm familiar with are for the Spy in Swashbuckling Adventures.