Iron Lore: Malhavoc's Surprise?

[Irda Ranger]

Feat Mastery

This is my analysis of the latest Design Diary, Feat Mastery.

The Feat advancement didn't work quite as I expected. I thought that the Feats would naturally upgrade as the PC achieved new levels of Mastery, kind of like how spells got better as Casters got higher in level. It seems though that a certain level of Master only allows you to choose a new Feat, and doesn't upgrade the Feats you already had.

That's Ok though. It just means that the Feats you can purchase are going to be cooler and more powerful than ones you would have gotten for free (remember, there is no Free Lunch in Game Balance; everything's a tradeoff).

I like Mearl's discussion of prerequisites for Feats. It's bothered me a little too that a 1st level fighter with a 13 in Int could take Expertise, but a 20th level Fighter with a 12 Int could not. I didn't think it was a major concern, but this is like scratching an annoying itch. (I also always wondered what happened in you were wearing Int boosting items when you leveled up, but that's another thread.) As you can see, the Mastery progression neatly solves this little problem.

Mearl's is right that the D&D system didn't provide a bunch of options for high-level Fighters, but that must be for the Core books only. Considering how many supplements there are out there, I imagine there must be a bazillion cools Feats for high-level melee types. Oh well, at least with IH we won't have to buy supplements to get them. (Which is only expected - a primarily melee-based system that didn't provide a lot of cool melee Feats would be a bit of a waste of money).

We've heard the claim that IH will speed of NPC design, and now Mearls claims that this Feat Mastery progression is part of the solution. He's probably right, as selecting a few Feats have got to be a lot faster and easier than choosing how to spend the NPC's gold-allotment based on level. Select the Feats, give the man a sword and shield, and you're done. I like that. For me, my favorite part of NPC design is the history, motivations, politics, etc. By the time I'm done with all that, selecting magical items to make them "Level Appropriate" always seemed more like a chore than a joy. Selecting Feats may end up being the same, but at least I can get it over with more quickly.

My only remaining question, at the end, is based on this sentence:

In the vast majority of cases, a feat has a base mastery, usually 1, and then a series of expanded, higher mastery expansions that you can select as you progress in level. You cannot take a feat's expanded mastery options unless you already have the base feat.

Does this mean you have to take them in order (1, 2, 3, ...), or can you take them in any order as long as you have the first one and meet the Mastery requirement? It sounds like the second (and the second improves the chances of Mastery 10 feats actually getting chosen), but I'm not 100% sure. Mearls?

Overall, nothing earth-shattering, but a nice progression towards how the whole system works.

 

[JohnSnow]

Sorry to contradict, but I'm afraid this:

My guess is they'll just hand wave it away. At level X your attacks count as magical for purposes of Damage Reduction. But, I could be off, that just seems the easiest way to handle it.

has been directly addressed by this (from page 4):

ecliptic observes:
I am just afraid the book may take it a bit too far. Like a feat that makes your weapon "magic" for going through damage reduction.

ICK! No, IL does not cheese out on you like that.

So, we can infer that there's no ability/feat that makes the character's attacks count as magic.

Maybe it's a much more mundane solution. Are spectres vulnerable to fire or any other form of conventional attack? Mike never said that the characters would be able to use their "regular" weapons. And the second playtest report certainly implied that the PCs were scrounging for stuff to use against the babau demon. And it certainly fits the mystique of Conan (or Aragorn, I might add) suddenly switching to fighting with a torch/flaming brand against such things.

Anyone remember how Conan, Fafhrd or the Grey Mouser fights ghosts (in the stories, that is)?

EDIT: Interesting analysis Irda Ranger. I'll put my thoughts in another post.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Anyone remember how Conan, Fafhrd or the Grey Mouser fights ghosts (in the stories, that is)?

EDIT: Interesting analysis Irda Ranger. I'll put my thoughts in another post.

Ghosts very rarely show up in Conan, and when they do they are mostly helpful, as I recall.

I'm only just now reading F/GM comprehensively. From the short stories I knew before I can't recall them fighting anything incorporeal. Though there was an adventure where most of their foes were invisible.

I like the idea of having to switch to a common substance or perform some sort of easy or common ritual.

The former concept would fit with some of Mike's work in AE. Sacraficing something of minor value for a short term benefit.

 

[JohnSnow]

Okay, a few of us (myself, Irda Ranger and Dr. Strangemonkey, in particular) were over on the Malhavoc boards hashing around the information in this little gem:

www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=131871

What it shows is a 6th level berzerker in Iron Heroes. Looking carefully at the character, you see that he has Defense 16 (Active +6, Passive +0). From that and some of the other info, you conclude that the character has a +2 defense bonus due to his Dex and +4 from other sources (probably his class defense bonus). If this is the case, then the class defense bonus is an "active" bonus. Which means it probably doesn't work under the same conditions under which a D&D character loses his dex bonus (i.e. flat-footed, surprised, or flanked). This is actually even realistic, as most defense in the real world is active. If you make defense something that characters only get the benefit of when they're prepared for an attack, you make ambushes DEADLY without having to resort to the strange mechanics of some other "reduced-magic" settings (Green Ronin's Black Company for example).

As an aside, this aspect of Iron Heroes might even create an acceptable explanation for why Conan or Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser were actually concerned when surrounded by low-level mooks. Against large groups of opponents, any flanking character gets to bypass nearly ALL of the defending character's defense. That makes such groups a SERIOUS threat. And since the archer preview implies that flanking works at range...

Just thought I'd share.

 

[Irda Ranger]

As an aside, this aspect of Iron Heroes might even create an acceptable explanation for why Conan or Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser were actually concerned when surrounded by low-level mooks. Against large groups of opponents, any flanking character gets to bypass nearly ALL of the defending character's defense. That makes such groups a SERIOUS threat. And since the archer preview implies that flanking works at range...

Just thought I'd share.

And as I said at Monte's boards, I think this is a seriously good idea. It really makes the "you're surrounded by goblin archers" a serious problem, even for high-level folks; while still letting you battle the uber-demon mano a mano.

For the "mythic heroism" feel I'm aiming for, this goes a long way in the right direction.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Against large groups of opponents, any flanking character gets to bypass nearly ALL of the defending character's defense. That makes such groups a SERIOUS threat. And since the archer preview implies that flanking works at range...

Just thought I'd share.

'Stay by the wall, stay by the wall, do not move away from the wall...'

 

[JohnSnow]

Okay, a few comments on feats and feat mastery. By the way Irda Ranger, nice analysis above. I agree that Mearls' comment implies that only the basic feat is required before higher mastery can be taken and not ALL of the levels. But I think we need confirmation.

Taking Mearls most recent diary combined with a few of the other previews we've seen leads me to the following observations. First off, character classes seem to get Advanced Mastery of one category (+2 at level 1, +1/2 levels), partial mastery of a second (+1 at level 1 +1/2 levels), limited access to a third (+1 at level 3, +1/2 levels) and standard access to all others (+1 at level 5, +1/2 levels). Near as I can tell so far, the following are the "types" of feats I've been able to come up with:

Defense
Finesse (weapon subtype)
Lore
Power (weapon subtype)
Projectile (weapon subtype)
Tactics

Also, it seems characters get 1 feat at 1st level (The Archer & Hunter "samples" have only 1 feat a piece). The 6th level berzerker preview and a little logic would indicate they get 1 feat/2 levels (+ whatever they get as class bonuses). It's possible they gain their feats every odd level, and the berzerker gets 1 bonus feat, but I find it more likely that all characters gain 1 feat every even level (2, 4, 6, 8, etc.) which would give the berzerker 4 feats at 6th level (1st, 2nd, 4th, and 6th). The sample berzerker has taken level 3 mastery in Power Attack, plus the Quick Draw feat. It seems odd that characters can be eligible for level 2 mastery at 1st level and not have 2 feats...but on the other hand, their mastery level doesn't increase at 2nd level, so maybe it's so that characters with the appropriate mastery can take level 2 mastery as soon as they have the feat for it (2nd level), if they so choose.

Oh, and I'm not sure I disagree with Mearls that there aren't a lot of options for high-level fighters. There are lots of feats to pick from, sure, but not a lot of them that specifially target the "high level fighter" type. The D&D fighter basically ends up using a lot of his high-level feats to expand his breadth of options rather than actually increase his abilities. Greater Weapon Focus (and Specialization) and some of the archery feats are the sole exception. But even Great Cleave and Whirlwind Attack are available at 6th level if you pick carefully. Granted there may be some cool feats in other books (Book of Iron Might for example) that I don't know about. I admit the tactical feats from Complete Warrior and other sources do come to mind.

By the way are there any feat categories (for the list above) that we know about that I'm missing?

 

[Erekose13]

Regarding all the attempts to pull info from the previews so far here are a few points that you are spot on about.

Irda, your second point is right (you dont have to take all of the feat mastery levels in order as long as you have the base one)

Mastery 10 is still hard to get at, the archer, the best at projectile weapons only gets to 10 at 17th level.

You do indeed get feats faster than Core.

 

[JohnSnow]

Adjustment:

It's not a solid +1/2 levels. If the archer and hunter previews are any indication, characters stop gaining improved mastery at level 17. So that you have Mastery 10 in one category, 9 in another, 8 in a third, and 7 in all others.

Based on the currently available set of 2, that would seem to be the rule. Of course, some classes may deviate from the norm.

Oh, it's also possible to hit the berzerkers 4 feats at level 6 if he gets 2 at level 1 and 1 at every odd level. But that's not consistent with the sample archer and hunter seemingly having one feat each at 1st level.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Oh, it's also possible to hit the berzerkers 4 feats at level 6 if he gets 2 at level 1 and 1 at every odd level. But that's not consistent with the sample archer and hunter seemingly having one feat each at 1st level.

My theory is one at character creation and then one feat at every even level.