PDA

View Full Version : Keeping Iron Heroes iron heroes



graymachine
2010-07-02, 01:17 AM
Recently we started up a game of Iron Heroes, much to my joy. I've always wanted to play in this setting; bristling age of heroes and the unknown, plus actual magic is amazingly dangerous. I'm playing an armiger that is a barbarian and a slave to the party leader to boot. This, however, is where my worries come in and the purpose of my post; I'm seeing my fellow players slipping into familiar roles of traditional D20 and I'm looking for advice to prevent that.

Cause in point: a villager, drunk and pissed off, challenged me in the middle of the village to a fight. Accordingly, I broke his arm and left him for dead without a second thought. A couple of players got upset and tried to heal him, checks all around, to which the DM simply said that without them at his bedside for months he would probably die. And they decided to get upset with me, which usually would be understandable, but they seem not to get the general disregard for the sanctity of life on this setting. So, how do I deal with that?

Secondly, for those familiar with the setting, the one guy that decided to to play an arcanist has gone off the deep end. He decided on the "safer" schools of divination and illusion. Now, I pretty sure that he doesn't understand how magic can backfire on him, even though he has read the rules. He'll, he was looking for, basically, lost change in the first session with divination spells. I mentioned to him that the book suggests that you should be more or less completely out of options before you even think about casting a spell, which he took with an indifferent manner. So, the question is how should the party best go about burning him as a witch when he inevitably screws up bad without pissing off the player?

AvatarZero
2010-07-02, 03:57 AM
It sounds like you and your fellow players have different ideas for what should happen within the game. Here's the issue though; even if you are right, and the implied setting of Iron Heroes includes a lot of casual violence or witch hunting (and I have the book, so you could tell me which page that's on, it's not obvious), if the other players (or the DM, who you didn't mention) don't want to play the game like that then you're in the minority and it'll be you that needs to change to fit with what they want to do.

Talk to everyone else at the table about what sort of game you expected and what you want to play. Resist the temptation to use the book to give your opinion moral authority; speaking from experience there's no faster way to lose friends than to say "The way you want to have fun is wrong, the book says so."

And if you've got a really excellent group of friends (the sort of group most RPG players I've met would pay to join), you could talk about making that conflict about methods be part of the game. Your character suggests the brutally effective method for dealing with an encounter, their characters suggest something else, the DM arranges for neither group to be obviously wrong all the time and every one has fun roleplaying. (Of course, violence is normally faster than the alternative, so even if your character wants to start breaking limbs, you should find a way to make him reluctant to do it.)

Nero24200
2010-07-02, 05:26 AM
My advice for the arcanist is just let him have it. Players have a responsibility to at least know how their class works - If you can't understand spells then you shouldn't be playing a spellcaster.

Just gently remind him that he should reserve his magic when he can. If things go south, he'll have no one to blame but himself.

Alternativly, you could ask the DM to help emphasise the witch-burning aspect of the setting. Have the PC's walk into a town to actually witness a witch burning could be a good start.

Gametime
2010-07-02, 01:00 PM
Does Iron Heroes even have rules for infection? If not, I'm not sure how a broken arm would end up being lethal.

Regardless, the above posters pretty much have it right. Iron Heroes encourages actions in line with your character, without much concern for morality, but if the other players don't like that then it's to the detriment of the game to insist on it.

If you explain to them the sort of feel you're going for, though, and that you think it would be cool to show anyone foolish enough to challenge you the error of his ways while yelling "CROOOOOOOOOOOM!", they might be on board for that. Communication is always the best policy.

As for the Arcanist... if he isn't too attached to his character, an arcanist-gone-mad makes for a great twist villain. :smalltongue:

Umael
2010-07-02, 01:16 PM
Got to second the whole "What do you mean, the villager would die???" line. I don't see where the DM is getting that. Setting a broken arm is not that horrible of a thing to have to do. Iron Heroes might have a setting which is brutal, but it is not a "broken-leg-have-to-put-'em-down" kind of thing. There ARE healers, be they midwives or witch doctors, who can take care of these kinds of things.

Of course, I have a few other thoughts on this as well, such as how is it that if you broke his arm you "left him for dead"? Also, the PCs getting mad at you? You are a slave to the group leader. The only one who gets to get mad at you is your master. The group should be getting upset with HIM for not keeping good enough control over you.

As for conveying to them the sanctity of life in the Iron Heroes setting (i.e., it is very small), you should be asking them OOC if they are playing by the same setting you are. If you think that is the setting, then of course your PC should be all dismissive of the damage he caused.

The arcanist is a different issue. You tried to warn the player, he didn't respond, so you might want to ask the DM if he is playing it as dangerous as it is supposed to be. If the answer is yes, and the DM is aware, then make sure you mention things IC like, "I stay away from the crazy warlock!" and "I give you a look and ask if you're possessed by some demon while backing away with one hand on my weapon." If any other PCs say something similar, talk to them IC about the "crazy warlock", but don't do anything. The player will either get the message or you can say OOC "I told you so" while fleeing the mob with their pitchforks and torches.

Gametime
2010-07-02, 01:31 PM
Umael makes a good point: your status as a slave could provide good roleplaying fodder for personality conflicts within the party. It gives you a way to advocate unmitigated violence while also be restrained by an in-story, rather than metagame, explanation; essentially, you don't get to act as you want, but you can want to act as you want, if that makes sense.

If the other players are into conflicting character goals, that could provide some really cool scenarios. If they aren't, well, it probably won't help.

Aroka
2010-07-02, 02:27 PM
Don't tell people how to play their characters - nobody likes that. Have a talk with your GM about the setting's style and see if you can agree, and if so, if you can pitch him some ideas to get it across. The GM is the only one who has the power to describe the entire rest of the world objectively.

Tanuki Tales
2010-07-02, 02:48 PM
Don't tell people how to play their characters - nobody likes that. .

That goes both ways you know. The party not liking the way he plays and thinking its "wrong" is equally unacceptable.

Aroka
2010-07-02, 04:12 PM
That goes both ways you know. The party not liking the way he plays and thinking its "wrong" is equally unacceptable.

Big difference: their characters got upset at his character's actions. Lecturing the players on how they should play isn't really going to help. The GM is the only one who can really make a difference in immersing them into the sensibilities of the setting. A player playing the same way will help, but only if the GM makes it clear (by showing, not by telling) that it's the standard of the setting.

Even then, the players may just prefer to play "good guys" who don't put up with callous murder.

But if the GM starts showing the world in a specific light, and maybe throws up scenarios that actually reward playing to the tone (the witch being burnt at the stake actually is dangerous and evil; not being selfish, callous, and ruthless is hard and unrewarding; sometimes there's no good choices; etc.), and does it well, he can at least give the other players a chance to find out if they enjoy that sort of setting.

Umael
2010-07-02, 06:04 PM
Big difference: their characters got upset at his character's actions.

Um... I read the OP's post as the characters AND the players getting upset with what he did, IC and OOC.


Lecturing the players on how they should play isn't really going to help.

No, but again, it seemed this was a double-edge sword.



The GM is the only one who can really make a difference in immersing them into the sensibilities of the setting. A player playing the same way will help, but only if the GM makes it clear (by showing, not by telling) that it's the standard of the setting.

Even then, the players may just prefer to play "good guys" who don't put up with callous murder.

1) It wasn't callous murder, it wasn't even murder, it wasn't even a particularly good call on the part of the DM (keeping someone on their deathbed for several weeks from a broken arm??).
2) If the setting doesn't call for it, this might be a case where the group is playing with the wrong idea.

Boci
2010-07-02, 06:13 PM
Got to second the whole "What do you mean, the villager would die???" line.

Starvs to death from being unable to work? I'm guessing sick pay isn't very common.


"The way you want to have fun is wrong, the book says so."

This is more a case of "Your idea of fun does not mesh well with the stock flavour of Iron Heroes", which is also annoying to hear, but entierly justified and if worded more tactly than I did, could serve as a valid point for the OP to make to the other players.

Akal Saris
2010-07-02, 06:18 PM
Maybe they just don't want to play brutal murderers? I mean, I played in Iron Heroes too, and there's rule actual law that you have to possess a callous disregard for human life.

Then again, I never played an armiger. Maybe playing a horrible class makes you realize how little life is really worth.

Umael
2010-07-02, 07:05 PM
Starvs to death from being unable to work? I'm guessing sick pay isn't very common.

...

No.

Unless the guy has only one arm, he can still work.

I find it really difficult to believe that someone in the times of ancient Babylon essentially be given a death sentence if their arm was broken. If you can do a Heal check to splint the arm, I'm going to want to know how is it that the broken arm is so life-threatening. Please, someone explain that to me.



Maybe they just don't want to play brutal murderers? I mean, I played in Iron Heroes too, and there's rule actual law that you have to possess a callous disregard for human life.

Again, who said it was a brutal murder?

You know, there might not be any rule saying you have to have a callous disregard for the well-being of human life, but if the setting implies a certain attitude, why is the player being punished if he is playing according?

In d20 Rokugan, I could have my samurai kill a hinin just to test out the sharpness of my katana. If the players protest, we're not playing the same game. There ARE appropriate in-character responses to those kinds of actions.

Boci
2010-07-02, 07:09 PM
...

No.

Unless the guy has only one arm, he can still work.

I find it really difficult to believe that someone in the times of ancient Babylon essentially be given a death sentence if their arm was broken. If you can do a Heal check to splint the arm, I'm going to want to know how is it that the broken arm is so life-threatening. Please, someone explain that to me.

You are assuming 2 very uncertain things:

1. His job is such that he can do it one handedly. There are plenty that require 2 hands.

2. Assuming he can do it with one hand, you are assuming he is in a position to still get paid to do work. Whose going to pay a one armed worker if there are other available who have no such handicap?

Ranos
2010-07-02, 07:32 PM
Your arcanist is actually right to blow you off. Magic may carry a lot of social stigmas, but it's not actually that dangerous. Know what he was risking if he failed that divination check to find pocket change ? And I mean, the very worst result that could happen ever on a failed divination. Temporary ability damage. Yep.

Umael
2010-07-02, 11:22 PM
You are assuming 2 very uncertain things:

1. His job is such that he can do it one handedly. There are plenty that require 2 hands.

2. Assuming he can do it with one hand, you are assuming he is in a position to still get paid to do work. Whose going to pay a one armed worker if there are other available who have no such handicap?

You're also assuming that IF he can't do his job that he will be unable to get another job, as well as assuming that he can't BEG for a living - or at least for the six weeks or so it would take for him to heal.

At this point, I would like to know what OP has to say about the DM's reasoning before I continue this line of discussion with you because I really don't see either of us getting anywhere with it.

Mike_G
2010-07-03, 08:21 AM
...

No.

Unless the guy has only one arm, he can still work.

I find it really difficult to believe that someone in the times of ancient Babylon essentially be given a death sentence if their arm was broken. If you can do a Heal check to splint the arm, I'm going to want to know how is it that the broken arm is so life-threatening. Please, someone explain that to me.




Just to weigh in, as a Paramedic, and an Othopedic Tech who works a aprt time gig in an Ortho office when I'm not on the ambulance, a fracture, if not properly set, can lead to life threatening conditions.

The bone can shift, doing more tissue damage, swelling can cut off circulation, and the tissue downstream from the fracture site can die, become necrotic, and you can go septic and die. A blood clot can form, travel to your heart or pulmonary circulation and kill you. If the fracture is open, or compound as it's sometimes taught, the break in the skin can let infection in and you can get septic and die.

All these things did happen in preindustrial society. I don't think it was common to die from a broken arm, but it wasn't trivial like it is today.

The most likely bad outcome is the bone heals out of position, and he has problems using the arm. That was probably pretty common for the lot of a filthy peasant.

So, maybe the DM was being a bit strict, but a bad break in a primitive society can be dangerous.

Nero24200
2010-07-03, 10:35 AM
Maybe they just don't want to play brutal murderers? I mean, I played in Iron Heroes too, and there's rule actual law that you have to possess a callous disregard for human life.


That wasn't really callous disregard for life. It was breaking an arm. I've seen my fair share of drunken fights, and if you're leaving one with a broken arm you're actually lucky.

In fact, I've personally seen some drunks (or people on certain drugs) who won't stop fighting if they start, so doing something like breaking an arm is really the only way to ensure they'll stop attacking you (since they can't punch with a broken arm).

Now there may be more to the story, but given what I've read it doesn't seem unreasonable at all. On the contrary, saying that the drunk will be bedridden and die is a bit much. Even if a broken bone can lead to infection he's not going to be bedridden.


Your arcanist is actually right to blow you off. Magic may carry a lot of social stigmas, but it's not actually that dangerous. Know what he was risking if he failed that divination check to find pocket change ? And I mean, the very worst result that could happen ever on a failed divination. Temporary ability damage. Yep.
It's not just the mechanics. The implied setting of Iron Heroes has magic as a dangerous thing. Just like with medievil Europe it is viewed with heavy suspcian. Casting for something as trvial as spare change isn't really within the spirit of the setting.

Picture this - You're a witch and just happen to be living in Salem at the time of the witch hunts. Are you going to risk being burned alive just to find some small change on the ground? I wouldn't.

Gametime
2010-07-03, 10:55 AM
Just to weigh in, as a Paramedic, and an Othopedic Tech who works a aprt time gig in an Ortho office when I'm not on the ambulance, a fracture, if not properly set, can lead to life threatening conditions.

The bone can shift, doing more tissue damage, swelling can cut off circulation, and the tissue downstream from the fracture site can die, become necrotic, and you can go septic and die. A blood clot can form, travel to your heart or pulmonary circulation and kill you. If the fracture is open, or compound as it's sometimes taught, the break in the skin can let infection in and you can get septic and die.

All these things did happen in preindustrial society. I don't think it was common to die from a broken arm, but it wasn't trivial like it is today.

The most likely bad outcome is the bone heals out of position, and he has problems using the arm. That was probably pretty common for the lot of a filthy peasant.

So, maybe the DM was being a bit strict, but a bad break in a primitive society can be dangerous.

The problem is that D&D really doesn't have any rules to govern severity of wounds beyond hit points. Infection, blood clots, and necrotizing tissue aren't governed by the rules, which means they come down to fiat. There's nothing wrong with the DM exercising fiat, but in a case like this it sounds like it was an arbitrary decision designed to punish a player for using violence.

Avoiding arbitrariness in this sort of this is difficult, of course, since you can't rule the same way every time (or broken bones become either harmless or inexplicably, consistently lethal) and you can't rule differently but intentionally every time without creating perceptions (real or imagined) of bias.

Some sort of chart to roll on for random lasting wounds seems the best way to govern it, but the impression I got was that there was not any random element.

Umael
2010-07-03, 01:15 PM
Just to weigh in, as a Paramedic, and an Othopedic Tech who works a aprt time gig in an Ortho office when I'm not on the ambulance, a fracture, if not properly set, can lead to life threatening conditions.

Okay, I got that.

But from my understanding, the other PCs made their successful Heal check to set the broken arm properly. The DM ruled that without constant care, the NPC would die.

From a medical perspective, could you please explain that?


So, maybe the DM was being a bit strict, but a bad break in a primitive society can be dangerous.

Perhaps I was sending the wrong impression that a broken arm just wasn't dangerous, period. Untreated, unset, yes, I can understand that (although I didn't know all of the nice and gory details; now I do, thanks). But if properly treated (cleaned, set, and not put under any further stress until healed fully), it shouldn't be life-threatening.

Mike_G
2010-07-03, 02:18 PM
Okay, I got that.

But from my understanding, the other PCs made their successful Heal check to set the broken arm properly. The DM ruled that without constant care, the NPC would die.

From a medical perspective, could you please explain that?



Perhaps I was sending the wrong impression that a broken arm just wasn't dangerous, period. Untreated, unset, yes, I can understand that (although I didn't know all of the nice and gory details; now I do, thanks). But if properly treated (cleaned, set, and not put under any further stress until healed fully), it shouldn't be life-threatening.

I'm not saying the DM made the right call. With a successful Heal check, I'd rule you could set a broken limb and in 4-8 weeks the limb may be good as new. Constant, round the clock care for a broken arm seems unreasonable.

Unless the "left for dead" implies that he beat the guy to negative HP, inflicting more injuries, like broken ribs or a ruptured spleen.

I was just trying to put the thought out there that while dying from a broken arm in 20th century America or Europe is pretty unlikely, Wulfric the Clumsy, tending his turnip plot a days walk from York in 985 AD might just die from a bad fracture.

Boci
2010-07-04, 06:14 AM
You're also assuming that IF he can't do his job that he will be unable to get another job,

Who hires a one armed man if there are those with 2 available?


as well as assuming that he can't BEG for a living - or at least for the six weeks or so it would take for him to heal.

Begging does not sound very promising in such a world.

You've raised some valid points, but I'm just saying, the villager will die comment from the DM could have been:

Their genuine belief as to what will happen.

Hyperbole for life will suck for the man in the near future.

A spur of the moment houserule to make the players feel guilty.