Iron Lore: Malhavoc's Surprise?

[A'koss]

Just so everyone knows, the next playtest spotlight is up at Malhavoc's site:

http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_IL_playtest2

It's Piratecat's group and it sounds like they quite enjoy it. Not too much new is revealed but they did run some non-combat scenerios... "Kevin really enjoyed playing the thief in a political murder mystery," Adam said. "Switching between aliases to match which political faction the players were speaking to was a lot of fun for him -- and very entertaining for the group as a whole."

Another interesting tidbit... "However, he said the players probably enjoyed the concept of token pools the most. "They sought out every opportunity to earn and spend tokens within the game," he recalled, "often running two or more different pools at a time, depending on their character's abilities."

And another... "As DM, though, Adam's favorite mechanic was zones (a supplemental rules set coming in the October release Mastering Iron Lore. "[The] guidelines for adding areas to the battlefield where PCs and NPCs alike can trigger special effects really encouraged me to come up with cool places to fight, such as half-submerged ruins bubbling with explosive swamp gases," he said."

So, basically, you can spend an aim token so that the arrows you shoot are stacked on top of each other and you can use them to assist your climb. It doesn't make you "fly" up the wall, and you STILL have to beat the hardness. This is even doable in the "real world." It's just pretty HARD to properly place the arrows. Hardly what I call ridiculous at a level when core D&D is handing out "immovable rods."

I know... If you're going to harp on something Xena-like, look to the 20th level abilities where you can bounce arrows around corners. An "arrow ladder" shouldn't even be that hard to do IRL so long as you can penetrate the material you need to climb.

 

[Felon]

See, this is the sort of thing I needed to see. Groovy.

 

[Azgulor]

Y'know, I find it REALLY hysterical that people are jumping to conclusions based on the archer's "Arrow Ladder" ability. For starters, it's an ability that MOST characters aren't going to have before 13th level (probably 15th!). It's not even available until 11th, and I imagine most characters will be more attracted to either one of the other sniper shot abilities or an additional deadeye shot ability instead. So at 15th level, is this ability REALLY that Xena/comic book-y? From the class preview:



So, basically, you can spend an aim token so that the arrows you shoot are stacked on top of each other and you can use them to assist your climb. It doesn't make you "fly" up the wall, and you STILL have to beat the hardness. This is even doable in the "real world." It's just pretty HARD to properly place the arrows. Hardly what I call ridiculous at a level when core D&D is handing out "immovable rods."

Well, since the amount of available information about the product is limited, it's probably garnering more attention than it would otherwise. Also, the fact that I consider the Archer an archetypical staple of fantasy (Legolas, Robin Hood, etc.) and have NEVER seen a decent Archer class (IMO) that puts it on equal footing to their melee-oriented counterparts had me eagerly awaiting additional info on this class. I had extremely high (perhaps unreasonably so) hopes for this class based on the quality of Mr. Mearls work (which I have found to be among the best in the industry).

Maybe it was the presentation (laying escape routes in advance, etc.), maybe it struck me as a trademark trick I would quickly grow tired of, maybe I just thought it was cheesy. Probably, it was because I could actually hear the groans of my players in my ears as I envisioned a session where a PC or NPC suggested or used such a class "ability".

Think of it this way: I advance in the class so that I'm Ranged Death against moving opponents that presumably are defending themselves because they want to live. Is shooting a series of arrows against a structure/tree/etc. so that I can use them as an impromptu ladder really a challenge that I need to dedicate a class ability to do it? And one I'll achieve/take at high level to boot?

All of that aside, I never said the book wouldn't be good. Hell, I never said the class wasn't good. My reservation (and this seems a pretty consistent opinion of the posters that had similar interpretations to mine) was that the book was not necessarily trying to emulate swords-n-sorcery rather than default D&D High Fantasy. It's trying to present an equivalent D&D power level and style of play without the crutch of omnipresent magic. The error was mine, in that I expected the book to be something that it now APPEARS not to be. I'm certain Iron Lore will be a financial success - but I'm now uncertain that I'm part of it's target audience.

Azgulor

 

[Felon]

Think of it this way: I advance in the class so that I'm Ranged Death against moving opponents that presumably are defending themselves because they want to live. Is shooting a series of arrows against a structure/tree/etc. so that I can use them as an impromptu ladder really a challenge that I need to dedicate a class ability to do it? And one I'll achieve/take at high level to boot?

No, and what's worse, as a class ability a player would probably be looking to use it at every available opportunity, which would quickly grow trite. It might be cool the first time you pull it off, but after the tenth time...? The arrow ladder trick should definitely be more of a once-in-a-while stunt than a core feature.

 

[Andor]

All of that aside, I never said the book wouldn't be good. Hell, I never said the class wasn't good. My reservation (and this seems a pretty consistent opinion of the posters that had similar interpretations to mine) was that the book was not necessarily trying to emulate swords-n-sorcery rather than default D&D High Fantasy. It's trying to present an equivalent D&D power level and style of play without the crutch of omnipresent magic. The error was mine, in that I expected the book to be something that it now APPEARS not to be. I'm certain Iron Lore will be a financial success - but I'm now uncertain that I'm part of it's target audience.
Azgulor

Well it seems to me that they are trying to hit more that one style of play with the book. This gives them a broader audiance, obviously. If you don't want your archer to use the ladder of arrows, don't select it, it's an optional ability after all. If you don't think it matches your style of campiagn rule-0 it. I do think this product has the potential to allow lankmahr style games. I suspect there will be a section on different campign types and how to rule-0 those campigns for consistancy. Also note that the abilites that everyone is boggling at are 11th and 20th level abilities respectively. At those levels you are a raging force of nature anyway, allowing cinematic abilities is appropriate in characters that are tougher than warhorses.

From what I've seen, since all the really funky abilities are higher level, you could probably remove a big chunk of the cinematic stuff simply by mandating multiclassing.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

My reservation (and this seems a pretty consistent opinion of the posters that had similar interpretations to mine) was that the book was not necessarily trying to emulate swords-n-sorcery rather than default D&D High Fantasy. It's trying to present an equivalent D&D power level and style of play without the crutch of omnipresent magic.

...without the crutch of omnipresent magic items.

The error was mine, in that I expected the book to be something that it now APPEARS not to be. I'm certain Iron Lore will be a financial success - but I'm now uncertain that I'm part of it's target audience.

Yep.

Well it seems to me that they are trying to hit more that one style of play with the book.

That would be in direct contradiction to one of mearls' more insightful design philosophies.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Just so everyone knows, the next playtest spotlight is up at Malhavoc's site:

http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_IL_playtest2

It's Piratecat's group and it sounds like they quite enjoy it.

I believe to be strictly correct its another group which Piratecat plays in - the defenders of daybreak is one group, Sagiro's campaign is another group with overlaps, and this is yet a third group.

Especially notable for having "Adam Windsor, an Australian temporarily based in the United States for work" - perhaps better known here as Capellan, author of the fabulous Space Ship Zero, X-Path and Forge of FU adventure/storyhours. At last we know what he looks like

Cheers

 

[Mac Callum]

Wulf,

When are you going to forgive Mearls for his lousy marketing ability? As a game designer, shouldn't you be more focused on the actual content, rather than Mearl's assertions about it? At the end of the day, no one's going to buy the book based on what the author says. We've all seen too many authors try to hype their own work for that. We're going to thumb through it at the store, read reviews here at EN World, talk with playtesters, read the Design Diaries between now and August, etc. etc, and base our decision on that. At this point your posts just sound churlish.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Wulf,

When are you going to forgive Mearls for his lousy marketing ability?

Huh?

As a game designer, shouldn't you be more focused on the actual content, rather than Mearl's assertions about it?

I can only focus on what's been revealed so far, same as anyone else.

At this point your posts just sound churlish.

If you say so.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

If you say so.

Man, no offense to anyone involved in this nascent conflict, but you quoted a poster and the sum of your response was to add an additional word to his statement in italics.

If that's not deliberate and churlish snarkiness then we must not be on the internet.

Not saying you have to stop, your opinions are generally much valued, but at least own what you are doing.