[Iron Heroes] What's this game all about?

RigaMortus2

First Post
I went to Monte Cook's site and read up on Iron Heroes, and it sounds interesting. But I was wondering if anyone could explain the differences betweeh IH and D&D 3.5? Can you give me specific examples of the different mechanics Iron Heroes uses (combat, skills, feats, magic, other)?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


D&D 3.5: Clearly written, awesome rules-heavy high-magic.
Iron Heroes: Clearly written, awesome rules-heavy low-magic.

Iron Heroes is more similar to 3.0 though in terms of the need for erratta and tweaks. The magic system is pretty crap, but then again it's an optional thing tacked on.
 

Yeah, hong's got it right. ;)

In short, Iron Heroes is a ruleset aimed around eliminating the need for PC magic, in the form of spells or items, while maintaining the same power level as D&D. Thus, the goal is that IH PCs can face CR-appropriate encounters at the same levels as D&D PCs, but whereas the D&D fighter may need a fancy magical wardrobe to do it, the IH fighter-equivalent just needs a decent suit of armor and a plain ol' sword. Additionally, magic is cast in the Howard/Leiber S&S mold of being the province of corrupted cult sorcerers, deranged immortals, sinister fiends, or weird Creatures from Beyond. (Thus, it's rather predictably NPC-geared.)

The advantages of this approach are twofold: First, it more closely simulates a wider variety of fantasy archetypes than does D&D. Conan, Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser, and for that matter Legolas and Gimli aren't really renowned for their stuff, but for their abilities. Second, it eliminates the need for tracking gear, magical buff effects, and all that stuff.

IH has its disadvantages too. First off, there are holes, although the compiled errata and FAQ go a long way toward filling them. (In general, I'd argue that IH has far fewer holes even than D&D 3.5, especially when you throw in splatbook stuff.) Second, those who want not only lower magic, but a lower *power level* than D&D, will find that other systems (like Grim Tales) offer a better fit. Third, the game is not rules-light. I personally think that it's a lot easier than people give it credit for, but IMHO you have to experience the game to understand how it flows.

As to the major differences between IH and D&D:

1) The PC classes are almost all warrior variants: An archer, a heavy-armor guy, a berserker, a sneak-attacker, a movement-based light fighter, a master tactician, a jack-of-all-trades, a weapon master. The Thief (a class based around social skills and manipulation) and the optional Arcanist class are the two major exceptions.

2) Everyone gets a LOT of skills, and there are many more uses for them. There are skill challenges (take a penalty on a skill check to accomplish an unusual effect, like using Listen to pinpoint invisible opponents or Intimidate to demoralize several people at a time). There are giant feat chains built around getting more uses out of the skill. Some skill uses restricted to certain characters in D&D (bardic music) are for everyone in IH.

3) Feats are built into "feat masteries," which are basically feat chains with different prereq levels (all the way up to 10, which requires that your class be best suited to take the feat and that you be about 17th level). So, for example, Power Attack (1) works just like D&D Power Attack, but Power Attack (9) allows you to deliver an instant death attack if you take a -15 or greater penalty to rolls using PA.

4) Abilities are balanced not around uses per day, but around "tokens" which are generally per-encounter benefits. Only a few classes (and a few feats) grant tokens, and you pick them up by doing particular things (usually sacrificing actions or winning opposed checks). You track your token pool (we use poker chips or an index card; one player just writes them down next to his hp total), and in most cases, it goes away at the end of combat.

5) PCs get a bunch of abilities to shore them up against comparable-level D&D characters. Everyone gets two traits (similar to racial abilities) at 1st level, one feat every other level, a much more generous point buy than in core D&D, and better save bonuses (+1 per level to all saves). The game uses d4+x to generate hp (where x is anything between +2 for the casters to +8 for the barbarian types).

6) The game uses armor as DR and class defense bonus, as do several other d20 variants.

7) PCs have several combat options, some of which were introduced in Book of Iron Might and some of which are simply expanded classes of various actions that exist in core D&D. Besides skill challenges, there are combat challenges (like, say, fighting defensively in D&D, but with a field of similar options). There are stunts (basically opposed skill uses to generate combat benefits or to accomplish cool cinematic actions like blinding a basilisk for a round or firing an arrow into a dragon's maw to disrupt its breath weapon use). There are also zones (examples in D&D include traps, overturned furniture, and pretty much every kind of combat-usable terrain that module designers put into adventures; only here, there's a formal system of how to design them).

8) The NPC classes are *weak* compared to the PCs. NPC antagonist or "hero" types are generated using villain classes, which are basically a shorthand mechanism for whipping up in a hurry an NPC that fits a particular archetype (barbaric champion, dread sorcerer, demonic minion) without having to build the thing from scratch.
 

Ps

A plug for hong's IH webpage. It fixes some problems with the classes and feats, but also represents a lot of optional tinkering that makes several elements of the game just flow better. I am particularly fond of his armiger.
 


I've was able to read up on the Archer class, and it seems interesting, but I am not sure I am too impressed with the token system. I like the idea of it, but it seems useless for an Archer. You are essentially wasting time "aiming" at a foe to build up tokens, and by the time you are ready to spend them on some cool effect, the enemy dies and you waste all those tokens. Seems like they will hardly come into play, for the Archer anyway. Has anyone found this to be the case?
 

FWIW, I think hong's archer variant (and projectile feats) encourage greater use of aim tokens.

That said, in the RAW I do think that archers can make excellent use of aim tokens. The key here is that ambush really matters. The same way that a rogue gets a full round of sneak attacks if he gets the drop on his opponent, the archer gains a lot by getting a full round at the start of combat. If an archer is hiding, he can pick up 4 or 5 tokens in the first round. Compared with a hide-and-snipe for round 1, this can be an excellent strategy. 4 or 5 aim tokens allow even a 1st-3rd-level archer to use armor-piercing shot to gain an effective +4 to damage; or shoot right past cover; or inflict a DC 14-16 hindering effect.

The really deadly thing comes around 10th level, where the archer can combine Manyshot and token generation (2 per round for a move action) to maintain his stock of tokens sufficiently to throw out some extra damage every round, or unleash a more powerful special effect every 2 rounds or so, all while getting in a decent store of attacks.
 

Having run a game from lev 1-17 using the system let me say a few things. There is much potential for abuse of the feat system. a few of the chains to be frank are a bit much, specifically the one that increases the ammount of dr provided by armor. It makes many of the high level monsters in the game (d20 in general but most damningly in the iron heroes monster book itself) laughable. With that said, I love the feat system in this book, it is a vast improvement over the standard, making characters infinitely more customizable.

The character mix i had was two man at arms, a weaponmaster, a harrier, a thief and a berserker. I ran them through red hand of doom after getting them to one level below the listed appropriate level and then continued beyond that with my own stuff.

Unless I amped up the bosses in RHOD they got slaughtered, no matter the tactic's I used or how situationally difficult i made it for the pc's to gain victory, unless i simply raised the ac and hp of the villians, the battles were unmemorable to the point they would look around for the "real boss". Even the litch was so horribly inadequate that I had to resort to scaring them into negotiating or they would have mutilated him. which would have been fine but I don't enjoy a hack and slash style when i gm.

Once through RHOD, I found that due to the size of my group and their power level, I was using creatures three cr's higher then the party level as mooks. and would have to randomly assign damage in order to challenge some of the characters at all without killing the rest of the party. in short, if your weapon master wants to take the armor tree, don't let him. that would have solved the only major problem i had. You will still need to avoid creatures that do little damage but have many attacks in favor of the bigger damage per shot monsters.

Everyone had fun, the only one who had any rules gripes was me, and really only one at that, and I was encouraged to dig more deeply into the monster's manual's then usual. I like this system more then any of the other d20 variants i have played (I am addicted to d20 variants) and was glad to hear of Mr. mearls subsequent prosperity. It does exactly what it says it does, gives you cool, powerful characters without making them a product of their equipment. Even most creatures with DR's were handled easily enough though more slowly then the players had become accustomed.
 

RigaMortus2 said:
I've was able to read up on the Archer class, and it seems interesting, but I am not sure I am too impressed with the token system. I like the idea of it, but it seems useless for an Archer. You are essentially wasting time "aiming" at a foe to build up tokens, and by the time you are ready to spend them on some cool effect, the enemy dies and you waste all those tokens. Seems like they will hardly come into play, for the Archer anyway. Has anyone found this to be the case?

Completely different from my play experience. The archer would single out a lone enemy, build up some tokens and nail them. Actually he was the most powerful character in the group since the player was very smart about gaining/spending tokens.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top