Iron Lore: Malhavoc's Surprise?

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Same way people have for years.

The GM tells them so!

Presumably by describing their actions (cinematic) and the wicked and carnal intent of their enemies (heroic)?

or (for alternate churlishness)

Proving once again that Hackmaster is the grittiest system ever?

 

[Mac Callum]

That the Archer's BAB accelerates faster than the PHB fighter's BAB at exactly the point when you are assumed to have gotten a magic weapon with a higher magical bonus. In other words, it is designed to match BAB to BAB with a magic weapon wielding fighter.

Wulf's point that it isn't just the crutch of omnipresent magic, but rather of omnipresent items (weapons are items, magic weapons are magic items). A bonus is a bonus, whether it comes from magic items or whether is it is just built into the advancement chart from the beginning. Wulf's point is that D&D hides it in magic items.

I think it's more accurate to say that D&D hides its power-ups in items, while IL hides its power-ups in the class progression. (Of course, since everyone knows it's there, they're not too well hidden, really.) IL PC's are not item dependent.

I think the distinction between the items and the class progression is a pretty important one. As a DM you don't have to manage all the equipment for NPC's, or worry about the NPC's equipment falling into the hands of the PC's, making them too powerful. As a DM you can award your PC's with whatever you want - lands, titles, etc., without worrying that they'll somehow try to sell it for magical items. I can use Sunder on the PC's items without being a complete rat bastard. They can try to disarm an enemy, take his sword, and be just as effective. As a player you don't have to worry about getting nerfed because you lose the sword you sank 50,000 GP into. I mean, does Legolas prefer the bow from Lothlorien? Sure. Is he at a 5-level disadvantage without it? No.

The boosted progressions are just there to keep the classes in-line with the CR system. To date, that has been one of the biggest hang-ups for me.

I mean really, appending a single word is rude and vulger? And I thought an economy of words was desirable.

Those are independent concepts.

I was always a fan of Twain's alleged statement of apology that he couldn't write a shorter letter because didn't have enough time.

This is a complete OT, nit-pick, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't Twain. I can't recall the name now, but I feel like it was a general in either the American Revolutionary or Civil War writing home to his father. I feel like it was the Revolutionary because my sense is that it was a Brit.

Anyway, my Google skills have failed me, and I can't find the quote.

I am of the opinion though that whenever someone comes across a pithy quote of unknown origin, there is a strong urge to attribute it to Mark Twain. As urges go, this probably isn't the least illogical.

 

[buzz]

Then perbhaps should comparissiosn should be left out entirely? No more X will let you emulate Y because we don't want to get sticky or anything now no?

One simply should be aware that, with few exceptions, there are certain considerations of game-play that will figure into a design that will often trump exactly emulating the source material. This is paricularly true in games that don't rely heavily on GM fiat or narrative control on the part of the players.

In a story, whether Conan will be wary of a cadre of guards or wade through them is wholly in the control of the author; Conan will do what fits the needs of the story. In an RPG, Conan's stats will most likely clearly determine he either can or can't, barring an RPG with mechanics that are purely narrative (e.g., a system where the GM can out-bid [or whatever] the player, blocking their attempt to have Conan just cut down the guards, forcing the player to find an alternate solution).

I guess what I'm saying is that it may not be appropriate to cite a passage from Howard, because Howard was not writing an RPG adventure, he was writing a short story. The comparison isn't valueless, but it has its limits.

 

[JohnSnow]

Personally, I think this comes down to a difference in style. There's gritty, and there's "Grim and Gritty."

It seems to me that the direction Mearls is after with Iron Lore is gritty, heroic, and (to a lesser extent) cinematic. Bear in mind that I've only seen the same previews that all of you have, and I have no magic insight into Mike Mearls' mind or intention. However, from what Mike has said, he was inspired to create Iron Lore by the same stuff that "hooked" me on D&D to begin with. Given that, and some of his comments, I'm willing to take a stab at the "feel" Mike's trying for.

Earlier in the thread, Mike said

Iron Lore is a game of high action and adventure. Like most fantasy games, it draws inspiration from a variety of classic sources - Robert Howard, Fritz Leiber, Clark Ashton Smith, and so on. However, if you were to ask me which movie most closely embodies Iron Lore's design, I'd say Die Hard. John McClain is the prototypical Iron Lore PC - he's tough, resourceful, clever, and he takes a beating but keeps on going.

So, if John McClain is the epitome of the Iron Lore PC, the question needs to be asked as "what sorts of things can the PCs DO?" The point I was trying to make earlier is: arrow ladder is NOT a supernatural ability. It's a stunt - a trick. One that could be accomplished in the "real world" by a highly accomplished archer. I think the whackiest you'll get in Iron Lore stunts is something like a Jackie Chan movie, not Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. For instance, Jackie often scampers up walls quickly in his movies without using wires. Now, in the movies, he scouts the location and plans it out in advance, looking for this handhold and that handhold, and then he just has to execute it properly. Humanly possible, just not something most people could do "on the fly." (And Jackie often "screws up" some of these, just watch his outtakes).

And that's how I see an Iron Lore PC. They don't do anything supernatural, just things that you rarely see happen in the real world because most people just aren't accomplished enough to do it on the fly. Could they? As in, is it physically possible? Sure...if they worked at it a LOT. And by the mid-high levels, that's exactly what heroic PCs are assumed to have done!

So PCs are larger than life, and will be doing things you'd expect from Indiana Jones, John McClain, or James Bond (or the Three Musketeers, Zorro, Conan, or Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser if you want more genre-appropriate characters). At the highest levels, their exploits are legendary, and might approach the abilities of some of the "lower-power" comic book characters (Batman, Green Arrow, Hawkeye, Captain America) or legendary heroes (Roland, Robin Hood, or Hawkeye from Last of the Mohicans).

At least, that's how I see it.

 

[A'koss]

I think the whackiest you'll get in Iron Lore stunts is something like a Jackie Chan movie, not Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. For instance, Jackie often scampers up walls quickly in his movies without using wires. Now, in the movies, he scouts the location and plans it out in advance, looking for this handhold and that handhold, and then he just has to execute it properly. Humanly possible, just not something most people could do "on the fly." (And Jackie often "screws up" some of these, just watch his outtakes).

And that's how I see an Iron Lore PC. They don't do anything supernatural, just things that you rarely see happen in the real world because most people just aren't accomplished enough to do it on the fly. Could they? As in, is it physically possible? Sure...if they worked at it a LOT. And by the mid-high levels, that's exactly what heroic PCs are assumed to have done!

I think Jackie Chan is an awesome example - I do hope that IL allows for this style of game. But also keep in mind that HL heroes will have some inhumanly high stats (I assume) that should allow them to do things no human would be capable of. A Thief with a 28+ Dex for example and the appropriate skills should be able to do things that no olympic athelete in the RL could even dream of attempting.

I wonder if IL will gear and weaponry designed for characters with superhuman strength or agility?

 

[JohnSnow]

Well, if you take the DMG NPC example, a 20th level PC Rogue (Dex-maximized) should have a Dex of 26 (20 +6 from gloves of dexterity).

Now, if you assume a Dex of 26, that means the character is 8 points over human maximum. This translates to a bonus of +4 on Dex-related skills compared to a character with an 18 dex. Which means that it's a 20% increase on the success ratio of a d20. Compared to the skill rank difference (23 ranks vs. 4), this is nearly meaningless. So, in the end, it's more about skill than attributes.

That's hardly what I call "superhuman abilities" - more like superhuman training.

Does the d20 system place a high premium and a great reward on "experience?" Of course, but that's a part of the system that no amount of "gritty rules" will ever change about d20. And at low levels, I don't think IL PCs will be much better than their D&D counterparts. Here's the stats for Hunter PC clipped from Malhavoc's site:

Hunter Sample 1st-Level Character
Ability Scores: Str 14, Dex 15, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 14, Cha 10

Those stats represent a 38 point buy under standard D&D. However, I think it's entirely possible that IL PCs have higher "base" stats than their D&D counterparts (they start at 10 and go up from there, for example). However, I wouldn't be surprised if characters are limited to a starting score of no higher than 18 (or maybe 20?) in any attribute.

Again, just me speculating.

 

[A'koss]

Well, if you take the DMG NPC example, a 20th level PC Rogue (Dex-maximized) should have a Dex of 26 (20 +6 from gloves of dexterity).

You missed the Manual bonuses he's likely to have (potentially +5 more for Dex 31).

Now, if you assume a Dex of 26, that means the character is 8 points over human maximum. This translates to a bonus of +4 on Dex-related skills compared to a character with an 18 dex. Which means that it's a 20% increase on the success ratio of a d20. Compared to the skill rank difference (23 ranks vs. 4), this is nearly meaningless. So, in the end, it's more about skill than attributes.

Note that I said Dex *and* appropriate skills. Also, there was some mention early on that Iron Lore will use Ability Checks more (or that was my impression anyway).

 

[A'koss]

Those stats represent a 38 point buy under standard D&D. However, I think it's entirely possible that IL PCs have higher "base" stats than their D&D counterparts (they start at 10 and go up from there, for example). However, I wouldn't be surprised if characters are limited to a starting score of no higher than 18 (or maybe 20?) in any attribute.

Somewhere between 1st level maximums and potential stat boosting traits I suspect you won't see a starting max. less than 20.

 

[Mac Callum]

The point I was trying to make earlier is: arrow ladder is NOT a supernatural ability. It's a stunt - a trick. One that could be accomplished in the "real world" by a highly accomplished archer. I think the whackiest you'll get in Iron Lore stunts is something like a Jackie Chan movie, not Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

What he said.

 

[JohnSnow]

Thanks Mac Callum.

And while I'm certainly prepared to be proven wrong, neither of the sample characters on Malhavoc's site has an ability score above 18 (granted, it seems they don't include traits). My guess is that Mearls is sticking to standard d20 starting human maximums (before traits are factored in). The higher point buy just means characters get to be a bit better overall (i.e. strong, agile, tough, and smart, not pick 2). This is again like Conan, Fafhrd or the Grey Mouser.

And I don't know that the Manual bonuses are an inherent part of the d20 system so much as an alternative way of getting the PCs to the stats the characters in the DMG have due to items. Based on the equipment given for the DMG's sample NPCs, the most a character could afford, even at 20th level, is a couple more +2 items, manuals or the like.

Like I said, I could be wrong, but I don't imagine most 20th level IL PCs will have stats any higher than 30.