What are everyones thoughts on Iron Heroes?

[Akrasia]

...
-- About Iron Heroes: I am afraid that the new rules will make the combat system heavier than it already is, and thus combat will last even longer than in regular D&D. Any clue about that?
...

Yeah, this is an important factor for me. The last thing I want is a system with a slower, more ‘tactical’ combat system than 3e. I mean, I don’t mind tactical options per se (e.g. I think WFRP gets the right level), but I don’t like it when the game turns into a session of Advanced Squad Leader. (I know other people like those kinds of RPG, but that’s not my style. If IH turns out to be that kind of game, I'll be happy for them, but I'll take a pass myself.)

I'm curious about the management of combat from the DM's perspective -- is there a "tokenless" method for DMs?
...

This would be key IMO. If tokens add yet another complicating factor to the DM’s job, I will definitely pass. OTOH if adds more options for players without burdening the DM, then it should be okay.

...
The Iron Heroes bestiary has a novel system for doing NPCs, making it possible to make any sort of NPC from 1st to 20th level in under 5 minutes per NPC. Seriously....under 5 minutes.
...

Well, this certainly would be a very good thing!

...
Due to NDA concerns, I can't get into the any detail on the magic system. That said, it has been mentioned that magic is inherently dangerous in IH. Dangerous to the caster as well. With consequences for spell failure or miscasting depend on school of magic. If you like playing a character who takes chances and enjoys the notion of being 'hero or zero', then you will like the arcanist.

The magic system sounds rather similar to that in WFRP. Is this the case?

... The descriptions that I have read about it kicks my imagination into overdrive thinking about how it might better model the combat in the Conan or Berserk books than standard D&D does. ...

I asked this in the nearly identical thread over on the ‘d20/OGL board’, and I am still wondering – how does IH stack up against Conan? It seems Conan already accomplishes many of the things that IH promises – viz. deadly combat, nondependence on magic items, dangerous magic, etc.

 

[EricNoah]

At least as it's described here, tokens don't seem anything like managing resources like spells to me. I don't think you get to keep them from combat to combat, and they are earned as a result of actions taken in game against a particular opponent.

No, but within the scope of a single combat you'll be spending some time gathering resources (by doing what your class does to get tokens) and then expending them (to activate your special abilities). (edit: Ironically, in the article you link to there's a section called "Resource Management." Sounds like mearls had that in mind all along.)

Another example of something in D&D that's somewhat simliar -- the concept of Psionic Focus. You can do something (make a concentration check) to gain your focus; and you can expend that focus to gain a special effect based on what feats you have. Later, if you want to concentrate again you can regain that "token" (so to speak). True, you can't gain more than one psionic focus, or use more than one at a time, but the seed of the idea is there.

 

[Monte At Home]

You know, it occurs to me...

In D&D if you want to be a guy who is managing resources, you play a spellcaster. You need to keep tabs on how many spells or slots or psionic points you have left. (I'm one of these guys. It's fun for me to do this record-keeping; part of the challenge is using your resources without depleting them too early.)

f you DON'T want to do that kind of record-keeping, you steer away from a class like that and play a fighter or a rogue. In that case, you just need to move and attack, or use feats and skills, and your position on the battlefield is really the only thing you need to keep track of. (I tend to get a little bored in this role. If my options are basically Attack, Move, do something else to get me ready to Attack or Move shortly, or maybe use a magic item, that isn't a lot of options.)

In IH, it's looking like everyone will need to keep tabs on resources.

Maybe that's what's turning some folks off -- there isn't much of an option if you're not one of those "resource manager" type guys.

Spellcasters as resource management systems is something we talked about at length on a couple of different product (the Ritual Warrior in AE pretty much exists so that a person who wanted a non-magic using class could play a resource manager if he wanted).

There are, deliberately, some non-resource management options in IH.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yeah, this is an important factor for me. The last thing I want is a system with a slower, more ‘tactical’ combat system than 3e. I mean, I don’t mind tactical options per se (e.g. I think WFRP gets the right level), but I don’t like it when the game turns into a session of Advanced Squad Leader. (I know other people like those kinds of RPG, but that’s not my style. If IH turns out to be that kind of game, I'll be happy for them, but I'll take a pass myself.)



This would be key IMO. If tokens add yet another complicating factor to the DM’s job, I will definitely pass. OTOH if adds more options for players without burdening the DM, then it should be okay.



Well, this certainly would be a very good thing!



The magic system sounds rather similar to that in WFRP. Is this the case?



I asked this in the nearly identical thread over on the ‘d20/OGL board’, and I am still wondering – how does IH stack up against Conan? It seems Conan already accomplishes many of the things that IH promises – viz. deadly combat, nondependence on magic items, dangerous magic, etc.

I don´t think Iron Heroes promises "deadly combat" - at least not more deadly than usual D&D (probably less without Death magic).

--

CR is always a useful tool for determining the difficulty of encounters and the threat certain critters pose. But it also always uses some work. Varying group size seems to be lowest problem - just add or remove a few critters. This might sometimes fail for pregenerated encounters (like in modules), at least not without some work. (But I think every DM has the responsibily to work on a adventure before he throws it at his group)

For this matter, I don´t really bother if one of the solutions for "low-magic" is to define the max. BAB as +25 instead of +20. Without this kind of "hack", you have little chance to make the characters fit against high levels encounter - check the ACs of the monsters on those levels...

---

Personally, I am eager to see the new Iron Heroes. My only fear is that nobody in my group will DM it, and I will have to do it - I already suffer from having to master an Arcana Unearthed campaign instead of playing in it...

----

Spellcasters as resource management systems is something we talked about at length on a couple of different product (the Ritual Warrior in AE pretty much exists so that a person who wanted a non-magic using class could play a resource manager if he wanted).

There are, deliberately, some non-resource management options in IH.

Maybe the "magic" or the "spells" chapters in the various D&D/D20/OGL books should be titled with "Resource Management". It would definitely fit better for Arcana Evolved, where the Combat Rites (which are described as nonmagical) can be found at the end of the "Spells" chapter...

 

[GravyFingerz]

Spellcasters as resource management systems is something we talked about at length on a couple of different product (the Ritual Warrior in AE pretty much exists so that a person who wanted a non-magic using class could play a resource manager if he wanted).

There are, deliberately, some non-resource management options in IH.

Why did you forsake us Monte? August 1st is too far away!

Seriously, this game looks awesome; I am so buying it.

 

[Slobber Monster]

No, but within the scope of a single combat you'll be spending some time gathering resources (by doing what your class does to get tokens) and then expending them (to activate your special abilities). (edit: Ironically, in the article you link to there's a section called "Resource Management." Sounds like mearls had that in mind all along.)

My point wasn't that it wasn't a type resource management, but that it was a type of resource management rather totally unlike spells and x/per day abilities in D&D. That's more of a strategic concern, whereas this is purely tactical in nature.

Another example of something in D&D that's somewhat simliar -- the concept of Psionic Focus. You can do something (make a concentration check) to gain your focus; and you can expend that focus to gain a special effect based on what feats you have. Later, if you want to concentrate again you can regain that "token" (so to speak). True, you can't gain more than one psionic focus, or use more than one at a time, but the seed of the idea is there.

This seems like a better analogy.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I am really looking forward to this book myself. I really like the idea of stripping away all the magic items and removing the idea of set spells that are learned and cast.

But what I really like is the greater emphasis on true progression of skill. The Archer class given to us as an example is a perfect example of this. The Arcer's ability with a bow transcends merely being a greater ability to succeed at a basic attack. They gain the ability to peform all kinds of incredible feats, and ultimatly can become frighteningly accurate and deadly warriors.

Ugh, that was a horribly vague paragraph... Oh well...

Anyways, I am going down to my FLGS tomorrow to see if I can secure a copy of the book for when it is released.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I feel a huge amount of anticipation for this one.

Mike Mearls seems to me quite possibly the best game designer ever to work on pen & paper RPGs, precisely because he's a game designer in the RPG field, not an RPG designer. Iron Heroes also seems to hew a mighty blow at the heart of everything I dislike about D&D.

It's not a proper point-buy, and if it matches appropriate CRs, it won't be linear, but that's what 4e is for.

 

[Kunimatyu]

Can't wait for IH to come out -- I'll be buying the pdf immediately so I can view it at my research station rather than waiting to get it when I come back.

...

In other news, if IH succeeds, I fully except to see Mearls' name gracing the cover of the 4E PHB. And that'll be awesome.

 

[MacMathan]

The idea of having the type of interesting/complex options of a spell-caster that I usually play but in a melee type is one of the main draws of IH for me, that and a lesser reliance on magic items.

I almost never play pure fighter types as they become boring in combat after long and increasingly reliant on magic items as the levels go up.