Iron Lore - Tokens, what the heck are they?

[Celebrim]

Fom this article and other things that Mike has said, it seems that the tokens are a mechanism for handling non-magical resources, and also a neat way of getting around the x/day mechanism which is pretty difficult to logically justify.

I'd go so far as to say that from a gamist perspective, there is no difference between 'magical' and 'non-magical' resources. In effect, tokens allow you to cast what are (usually) 'non-magical spells'. At high levels, you'll note that even Mearls was scrambling to find mundane justification for the spell effects. It would be completely possible to make magical classes that expend tokens to cast spells, and in fact my guess is that Mearls will do exactly that. The WotC class that seems most similar in concept to what I now believe the Iron Lore classes to be like is the Warlock from CA.

I think that the tokens are probably more of an attempt to get somewhere between the 'at will' of feats and the 'once per day' of spells than they are away to get around x/day mechanism itself. In fact, just from the previews we've already seen one trait (at least) that offers 'once per day' bonuses. The Warlock suffers from his ability to do things at will, in that its very hard to make at will powers fair. By making them tokens, you let every character cast small spells every round in an encounter, or one or two big spells per encounter. Or to look at it another way, tokens let you balance having lots of feats by only being able to turn on X number of them in a given round.

Exactly what happens when - as they often do in many situations - one encounter flows into another one in long running battles is not completely clear. Reinforcements are the bane of Iron Lore characters. Perhaps encounters 'refresh' as soon as new groups arrive.

Once you realize that tokens are spells, you realize that they are going to be infinitely extendable and intertwinable with feats. At first that sounds like a good thing, but I wonder just how much more detail D20 can handle. I'm a former GURPS player. I know too much of a good thing when I see it, and all these 'spells' from every character nearly every round combined with more feats and situational abilities seems like too much of a good thing. I think you'll start drowning in calculations as everyone is essentially casting spells every round (and most of these are spells that generate fluctuating buffs), and deciding (as it where) which of their myriad feats that they are going to choose to use this round.

The system would work better for me if they removed it from a battle map and abstracted the combat a little. That way you could have the sort of cinematic combat where characters were actively shaping the world details in the way that the rules seem to encourage without getting overly bogged down. Whether or not that is actually a simulation of a 'gritty low magic' world is another matter entirely.

 

[Andor]

What a bizzare series of reactions. Did you guys pay any attention to the details? There will not be dozens of tokens per round. I thought it was pretty clear that the Hunter was the only class that started the encounter with any. And he can spend a FULL ROUND to get two more. The only other thing we know about token aquisition is that A) The hunter can give some of his away and B) Berserkers get fury tokens for taking damage.

So I'm doubting that there are dozens of tokens per round, and from all we've heard players spend them as fast as they get them.

And why are people boggling at the name of an accounting mechanism that represents several different things? Does it really kill you that the hunter can spend a full round observing in order to percieve enough of the details of the battle field to use the terrain to his advantage? Stop thinking of it as spending power points and look at what is happeneing in the game world.

Roger took a few seconds to survey the battle field and noticed the wall the goblins were hiding behind was delapidated. "Hogesen! Go left" he called "there a missing section of the wall you can shoot through." System translation: Roger took a move action to gain a tactical token and spent it to reduce the goblins cover bonus for Hogesen.

I fail to see the problem here...

 

[Driddle]

Celebrim has established himself as this thread's token complainer.

 

[BlackMoria]

And a 'I can do this 3 times this encounter because that's how many blue poker chips I have' is different? If anything, this mechanic seems more metagame-y, not less.

Playtester here.

It is different. A 3 x per encounter mechanic implies you get them regardless of choice.

With tokens, the player has full control over how he wants to earn them. You can chose to earn them or not. You can chose how many you want to earn and how quickly.

The one thing I think people are overlooking is that 'earning' tokens is an 'action'. Using the Hunter preview as an example - I can choose for my character to move (move action) and attack (standard action) and gain no tokens. Or I can chose to move and do nothing but 'study the battlefield' for my standard action and gain two tokens. Or I can chose to not move and not attack (or undertaken any other action that is a move or standard action) and spend my full round action 'studying the battlefield' and gain 3 token.

Also, you are not seeing all of the Hunter class in the preview (hence the comments about why no saving throws information). You are seeing only the salient points of the class. You may want to hold off making a final decision with whether IL misses the mark or not until you see the complete picture.

 

[Celebrim]

Did you guys pay any attention to the details? There will not be dozens of tokens per round. I thought it was pretty clear that the Hunter was the only class that started the encounter with any.

I said dozens of tokens per encounter. And you might try rereading the previews before chastising us for failing to read the details.

"Like many other classes, hunters build up a pool of tokens they can use to power special abilities. "

I think its pretty clear that most classes get token pools.

A 15th level Hunter starts with 7. That's probably fairly typical. Each class will differ in how it acquires and spends tokens, but each will have a starting pull per encounter. Each class will probably also differ in which level it may acquire certain feats. Apparantly the Hunter acquires access to Tactical Feats faster than any other class, so at a given level it would be further down a Tactical feat tree than say an Arminger - which in turn would be further down the Weapons Master feat tree.

The Hunter requires tokens by burning actions. We know the Beserker requires tokens by getting hit. We know that the Beserker was reaquiring 2 tokens a round at 4th level. This number may well increase. We can suspect that there will be feats that increase the number of tokens gained each round, and that different feats will be 'empowered' by spending tokens of different types in the same way that spells in AE are empowered by burning higher spell slots. In any event, we know that at 17th level Hunters gain a free token every round. So that in 3 rounds of combat, a 17th level hunter could spend at least 16 tokens buffing the other players in the party.

What's really going on here is that Mearls has invented a new magic system. The more I think about it, the more I'm liking it as a magic system and the less I'm liking it as a combat system.

 

[Celebrim]

Celebrim has established himself as this thread's token complainer.

A job I relish.

 

[Red Baron]

Celebrim has established himself as this thread's token complainer.

LOL.

 

[Red Baron]

I think its pretty clear that most classes get token pools.

Speculation.

A 15th level Hunter starts with 7. That's probably fairly typical.

Speculation.

Each class will differ in how it acquires and spends tokens, but each will have a starting pull per encounter.

Speculation.

Each class will probably also differ in which level it may acquire certain feats. Apparantly the Hunter acquires access to Tactical Feats faster than any other class, so at a given level it would be further down a Tactical feat tree than say an Arminger - which in turn would be further down the Weapons Master feat tree.

Speculation.

What's really going on here is that Mearls has invented a new magic system. The more I think about it, the more I'm liking it as a magic system and the less I'm liking it as a combat system.

Oversimplification. (Oh, and speculation.)

Celebrim, you're looking at an iceberg and claiming that you know how much of it must lie under the surface, but basing that calculation on having seen balsa wood float before. It's not that your reasoning is bad, but you're basing it on suspect premises. I happen to have proofread IL, so --without giving too much away -- I can see where you're right and where you're entirely wrong.

You're certainly not wrong in saying that what Mike has produced could be used as a "magic" system in some campaign, but you really ought to base your criticisms of Iron Lore on a more thorough knowledge of your topic, not an unjustifiable set of observations. Speculate all you want, voice your opinions by all means, but don't presume to know the flaws inherent to the underpinnings of a system when you've seen only the tip of the iceberg.

Everyone who would criticize the IL token system would do well to reread Andor's earlier post.

 

[Celebrim]

I think its pretty clear that most classes get token pools.

To which you respond, 'Speculation'. Well, ok, am I wrong? Do most classes not get token pools? Because if my speculation is wrong, then we've got a triple problem. First, the other classes would feel sort of left out waiting for the Hunter to give them Tokens. Second, it would be a terrible waste and terrible design to add this whole Token system just to support one class, and I'll speculate that Mearls isn't that bad of a designer. Third, Monte Cook has done the product a disservice by previewing a class whose main mechanic isn't shared with the other classes in the book.

But let's be perfectly frank. Speculation or not, I'm not wrong. Most classes do get token pools.

Each class will differ in how it acquires and spends tokens, but each will have a starting pool per encounter.

Again you reply, "speculation." But am I wrong? Do most of the classes spend tokens and acquire them in exactly the same way? And again, do most classes not have a starting pool per encounter? Maybe you are sworn to not answer those kind of questions (I've signed those agreements before myself), but I got to tell you, that word 'speculation' - it doesn't mean the same as 'incorrect'.

Each class will probably also differ in which level it may acquire certain feats. Apparantly the Hunter acquires access to Tactical Feats faster than any other class, so at a given level it would be further down a Tactical feat tree than say an Arminger - which in turn would be further down the Weapons Master feat tree.

Again you reply, "speculation", and here I must admit that some degree of speculation is going on which is why I began with 'probably'. I haven't fulled divined whether you get more feats or whether you get access to them faster, or whether feats have a skill-like aspect that causes them to increase in power as you increase in level. But as a general description of the differences between playing a Hunter and some other class, I think that's a pretty safe description because which ever the above it is the effect is basically the same.

If someone tells me that they have a RPG based of a D20 mechanic, I'm pretty safe in speculating that as the adjustments increase past +20, the random factor in the game will decrease to the point of eventual irrelevance. That's not speculation, that's inherent in the mechanic. You tell me you've got a mechanic based around trading tokens, there is a fine line between my speculation on the mechanic and the limits of what you can actually do. You might as well tell me that my speculation that poker chips would be pretty convienent for keeping track of tokens is mere speculation.

And if I see an iceberg, I can calculate pretty exactly how much ice is underneath it to keep that ammount of ice above the surface.

 

[Capellan]

First off, the game will not be balanced unless monsters get token pools.

I must suck as a playtester then, because I didn't give my monsters any tokens and they did just fine.

Sure, Iron Lore PCs get tokens. But they don't get +5 flaming burst holy greatswords. It's a bit of a trade-off