Iron Lore: Malhavoc's Surprise?

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

I thought the feat every even level was *still* a given. If you look at how the class abilities seem to be built, they seem to be geared towards leaving open spaces for feats. And what have we heard about saving throws? All I've read was that it'll be easy to keep your saves high without a lot of effort (and I assume feats) on your part.

A'koss.

There's references to dealing with the save or die problem of high levels, but I'll have to look them up.

If the feats are 2 at first then one at every even level then the berzerker in the Transcendance advertisement is short feat. Then again this is true of all the sample class builds as well.

 

[A'koss]

There's references to dealing with the save or die problem of high levels, but I'll have to look them up.

Hmmm, I must have missed that...

If the feats are 2 at first then one at every even level then the berzerker in the Transcendance advertisement is short feat. Then again this is true of all the sample class builds as well.

I'm thinking they probably should've gotten Cooper to check over their stat blocks first...

 

[glass]

I can tell you right now there is little, if any, scientific method in WotC's CR determinations. They come with a baseline, then use playtesting with their iconics to get a rough placement.

Hypothesis followed by empyrical testing is about as scientific a method as you can get.


glass.

 

[Particle_Man]

"core story" of IH?

Does the fact that magic items are rare, and not part of the "buffing up" part of the core story, change the core story significantly for IH? (Mearls was talking about the importance of core stories, check other threads around here and his livejournal but I am too lazy to find the relevant links).

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Hmmm, I must have missed that...

Well, it's chances of my being right or crazy are just about equal. That combined with a week of internet laziness probably reduce the chance of truly knowing a great deal.

At the very least we should be seeing saves that equate out to the save boosts of a cloak of resistance for most characters.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Not much new in the update this week. Mostly just information from the chat session.

The big thing for me was the assurance that IH would be well supported past the announced products and that the conversion rules would be in the core book.

Mastering IH looks like it will be pretty neat, and sparse as its promised to be I'm really looking forward to the default setting. Something about the name Swordlands seems very Tannith Lee to me even though I'm certain that won't be it.

 

[A'koss]

Not much new in the update this week. Mostly just information from the chat session.

Yeah, I was hoping to have a little more to nibble on this week, but, oh well...

The big thing for me was the assurance that IH would be well supported past the announced products and that the conversion rules would be in the core book.

Definitely good news, I hope it sells like AU so we can see support for a long, long time. But I still haven't heard anything about a GM screen, which to me seems damn near essential for a game like IH!

Mastering IH looks like it will be pretty neat, and sparse as its promised to be I'm really looking forward to the default setting. Something about the name Swordlands seems very Tannith Lee to me even though I'm certain that won't be it.

I'm already beginning to wish it was bigger... However, I'm not really interested in a default setting with a strong homebrew already in the works. Setting independent adventures, yes.

A'koss.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

I'm already beginning to wish it was bigger... However, I'm not really interested in a default setting with a strong homebrew already in the works. Setting independent adventures, yes.

A'koss.

The setting appeals to me, even in a bare bones version, because I think the vocabulary of world building is going to be so different for IH than it was for something like AU.

With AU it was really easy. You just went through and figured out where all the classes fit in the magical traditions. Now magical traditions make a great vocabulary because it's pretty easy to figure that magic has a pretty huge cultural component.

It's harder to see that with fighting traditions since you figure most cultures are going to need a good mix. Mearls has given us some clues with the 'archetypes' section in the class write-ups. Hunters being frontiersmen or elite agencies sort of a thing. So that's a help, but it's still not as formative as thinking well if you've got totem warriors then you're dealing a lot with spirits or Barbarians probably aren't as emphasized in armor happy cultures.

I suspect from the Berzerker preview that the basic vocubulary for adventuring in cultures will actually be traits+classes and I'm looking forward to seeing how that works on a macro level since we probably won't see all of the traits until the book comes out.

 

[A'koss]

The setting appeals to me, even in a bare bones version, because I think the vocabulary of world building is going to be so different for IH than it was for something like AU.

Oh, absolutely. But I think Mike has already given us a pretty good breakdown of the general style of game he's aiming for. As I like to call it, "cinematic sword & sorcery". Really, AU and the Diamond Throne setting go hand in hand, IH is obviously a lot more open-ended. I think you can pretty much instinctively grasp the feel of it.

With AU it was really easy. You just went through and figured out where all the classes fit in the magical traditions. Now magical traditions make a great vocabulary because it's pretty easy to figure that magic has a pretty huge cultural component.

It's harder to see that with fighting traditions since you figure most cultures are going to need a good mix. Mearls has given us some clues with the 'archetypes' section in the class write-ups. Hunters being frontiersmen or elite agencies sort of a thing. So that's a help, but it's still not as formative as thinking well if you've got totem warriors then you're dealing a lot with spirits or Barbarians probably aren't as emphasized in armor happy cultures.

What I think you're having trouble with is the sheer breadth of the IH archetypes. As you point out, AU is a lot narrower in focus with it's classes (like the Totem Warrior), in IH... you have the archer, the hunter, the man-at-arms, the weapon master... It's probably easier to just ask yourself, "Okay, with these skills, where would he be put to use?"

I just glossed over the hunter archetypes myself because as soon as I saw his skills I knew where he belonged. I think, develop the culture first, then the classes should slot into place pretty easily. It may be a little more tricky in filling the more specialized roles - dealing with culture-specific threats for example. Hmm, who do you put together to sabotage a Frost Giant's Army's supply line?

I suspect from the Berzerker preview that the basic vocubulary for adventuring in cultures will actually be traits+classes and I'm looking forward to seeing how that works on a macro level since we probably won't see all of the traits until the book comes out.

Traits will definitely play the key role in lending mechanical advantages to different cultures. I'm guessing that the cultural inspirations will all be fairly predicatable/identifiable with RW ones. And on that note, Mike said IH PCs are supposed to have 2 feats & 2 traits (which are at least as good as feats), in addition to your class ability(s) - all at 1st level? That's... actually a fair bit of capability I never even realized until now, not to mention distinguishing yourself early from the rest of the crowd.

 

[Irda Ranger]

My thoughts on the chat transcript

Are you being churlish by not directly saying what's on your mind?

Probably. I apologize for that. I wanted to present the the quotes as a tabula rasa, but couldn't quite help myself.

What new information does that chat reveal to you?

As for CR Equivalence, Celebrim pretty much summed it up.

Oh brother. Apparantly 'capable of going toe to toe with an equivalent CR encounter' means capable of going toe to toe with anything that is itself not magical.

At first Wulf's comments eased my apprehension, but then I saw the updated Iron Heroes Bestiary page.

The book also includes some basic advice on using monsters in Iron Heroes, such as mathematical methods you can use to judge whether a creature offers the proper threat to the party and new feats designed to work with monster abilities.

I was really hoping Mearls was serious when he said that you could "plug and play" IH classes with D&D adventures. I didn't know how he was going to do it, but I had faith. Apparently, his version of "plug and play" looks a little too much like "DIY modding" for my comfort. If there was anything I didn't like about Grim Tales (and there wasn't much), it was the whole figurin' out CR and EL thingy. It wasn't that it didn't work (it worked like clockwork), it just that I don't have enough free time/ inclination to do that sort of thing. I want the rules to "just work", and work simply, without a lot of tinkering or calculations. I'm lazy like that.

By the way, I also notice this on the same page:

The Iron Heroes Bestiary contains two dozen new monsters designed for use in Iron Heroes.

A whole two dozen? They better be darned interesting monsters. Maybe the villain classes will make it worth it. I always liked a good villain.

Oh well, enough griping. At this point I still plan on getting the book (which is high praise from me, since I buy so few RPG books). On to positive things.

Basicly, there is a lot of magic in DnD RAW that seems unnecessary to me. Planar travel, raise dead, undo curse, and such as that all seem to be basicly cheats for getting around conditions that would otherwise result in seperate stories.

Spot. On.

As many people have pointed out, Teleport would have made short work of The Lord of the Rings. Raise Dead makes sacrifice impossible and heroic death meaningless. I am so looking forward to having these gone from my game (yes, it's easy to ban specific spells; but it's very hard to ban so many that the game's fundamental assumptions are out of whack).

Mearls has essentially built a mechanic that rewards characters for doing nothing, which seems the antithesis of the high-action game premise.

But you're not "doing nothing", you're doing something useful and beneficial. Calling collecting Token "doing nothing" is the same as calling Readied Actions "doing nothing" or using a Spellcraft check to observe an enemy spellcaster "doing nothing." You're just not swinging a sword/ firing a missile. I like that. I like that PC's can "think" their way to being more effective.

I don't have much to say about the classes that don't have Tokens. I'm sure they're fine the way they are. If Mana works the way I think it does though, I don't know why they aren't just called "Mana Tokens." Perhaps you'd have to except them from so many other Token-based rules that it just wasn't worth it.

As for the wealth awards ...

wizofice (May 26, 2005 8:51:42 PM)
Mike, there's a thread in the Iron Heroes forum where people are making guesses as to (since there's not much in the way of magic items), where does all the gold go? Care to comment?

Mike Mearls (May 26, 2005 8:53:29 PM)
I give a few options and ideas, particularly with the alternate XP systems. For instance, let's say you want to run a game where the PCs are criminals, and maybe they don't trust each other. In that sort of game, you might award XP for the gold they recover. If a PC steals something without the rest of the party knowing about it, he might get bonus XP for that. When you pull money away from its current place in D&D (it's basically your point total for the point-buy/magic item part of character creation) you can do some really interesting stuff.

Mike kind of avoided/ misunderstood the question here. Wiz-Of-Ice was really asking "What can be done with money once you get it?" and Mike answered the question "How can money and experience be given out?" Not the same.

Nonetheless, it's an interesting insight. I remember the good 'ol days, when Thieves earned 2 XP per GP recovered. Man, you sure could advance quickly then. Anyway, I'm not sure I would use this rule, but it's an interesting take on the "story based" XP awards. It also flies directly in the face of "9 times out of 10, roll initiative" comments. Never, never, never hire Mike Mearls to do marketing.

The comment also reinforces the concept that wealth and level are independent concepts, which I think is only sensible.

It does leave the question begging: What do you do with all the gold? I'm not sure how much vicarious enjoyment my players would get from Ale & Whores.

The arcanist gains access to spell methods and a set of arcane class abilities. For example, you can create an arcanist who can blast his enemies with bolts of energy at will. The spell system takes a little getting used to. In essence, you gain access to a few spell recipes that you use to build spell effects. So, for an attack spell you choose the damage, area of effect, and energy type, then cast the spell. The more options a spell has, and the more abilities it features, the harder it is to cast and the more mana it costs.

Hmmm. I suppose once you get used to it it's Ok, but I never liked the "calculate on the fly" spell systems. Keeping track of initiative, HP, and what everyone else is doing is often enough to occupy my attention. Calculating a spell effect is just one more thing. I'll definately give it a shot, especially if the number of variables you have to figure for are low enough.

The one thing I don't like about a la carte spell systems is that they're either way to restrictive (by allowing you to only purchase effects from a list) or way to open ended (like Mage: The Ascension, where anything is possible, but must be adjudicated every single time). I've never seen one that allows for a happy medium of interesting spells (such as can be found in the Player's Handbook or Arcana Unearthed) while not requiring constant adjudication. We'll see.

I would also draw your attention to the bolded "can" in the quote. Not every Arcanist will be able to disperse energy at will it seems. I would assume that this power must be purchased, at the opportunity costs of other powers.

I also wonder if Traits will determine what an Arcanist is capable of. If so, you might be quite restricted in switching what kind of caster you want to be part-way through your adventuring career.