Iron Heroes

[Gametime]

So I've just finished reading through Iron Heroes, and it looks like it would be a lot of fun to play. I'm a little skeptical of just importing monsters D&D, though. Is the system-specific bestiary a must for adventuring, or can other d20 enemies work?

(Also, is it just me or does the magic system make evocation even more useless than it is in standard D&D? )

[rockdeworld]

I have a question too: since I heard Iron Heroes is like DnD without magic, except better (i.e. the whole fighting system is designed a lot better, and isn't just "you attack, you hit, they take damage, repeat"), could you rip the magic system from DnD and put it on Iron Heroes and get a better game?

[Swordgleam]

I don't think so. Because Iron Heroes is 'you, not your gear.' So you'd have to keep any IH classes from using magic items, but there isn't a system for stuff like reflex and fort since it doesn't matter, and... I think it would just be entirely too much work for not enough benefit. You might be able to convert a couple of the IH classes over, but it would require pretty detailed knowledge of both systems.

[Tinydwarfman]

So I've just finished reading through Iron Heroes, and it looks like it would be a lot of fun to play. I'm a little skeptical of just importing monsters D&D, though. Is the system-specific bestiary a must for adventuring, or can other d20 enemies work?

(Also, is it just me or does the magic system make evocation even more useless than it is in standard D&D? )

Most monsters will be about equivalent, but remember that many of them will have abilities that players will just not be able to overcome, so review everything closely before implementing it.

I also hate the magic system. I suggest This. It's a far better system, I actually like it more than the D&D magic system. It does need a little filling out though.

I have a question too: since I heard Iron Heroes is like DnD without magic, except better (i.e. the whole fighting system is designed a lot better, and isn't just "you attack, you hit, they take damage, repeat"), could you rip the magic system from DnD and put it on Iron Heroes and get a better game?

You could if you really wanted to, but it goes against the whole feel and purpose of Iron Heroes. Also, casting would still be way too good, possibly even better since there are no magic items. I wouldn't recommend it.

[Satyr]

I have a question too: since I heard Iron Heroes is like DnD without magic, except better (i.e. the whole fighting system is designed a lot better, and isn't just "you attack, you hit, they take damage, repeat"), could you rip the magic system from DnD and put it on Iron Heroes and get a better game?

If I would conscider something like this, I would do it the other way round and take the mundane Iron Heroes classes and replace their counterparts in D&D; for good measure, one could throw in the background traits (Imho the best thing in Iron Heroes by far) for all characters.
If you then kick out the more aggravating spellcasters (you know the ones I mean), you might end up with something that is a lot better balanced than standard D&D.
Hmm... Warlocks as the standard "arcane" and Binders as the standard "divine" spellcasters would even fit well enough to the mood of the game, I guess.

[kkortekaas]

After trying out Iron Heroes during an interlude in our 3.5 campaign, my entire group decided to drop what we were doing and start a fresh campaign using Iron Heroes.

It's utterly fantastic. It takes the emphasis off of "stuff" and puts it more on the character, by using skills and feats.

It's got mechanics to say, handle a archer creating a on-the-fly arrow ladder, for the harrier to climb, leap off and drive a sword though someone while tumbling past.

I'm actually working on converting some old 2nd edition Forgotten Realms modules using True Sorcery as the magic system.

see here

Mind you, it does require a couple tweak...the armigar or weaponsmaster (can't remember which off-hand) require a bit of tweaking to get right.

I've also had no difficultly using monsters from any of the 3.5 MM's, but you have to take into account that magic items to overcome DR don't exist (or are so rare they might as well not exist) and that some encounters are actually harder then the CR listed (any flying creature immediately makes the encounter more difficult, no more magic missles, or Composite Longbows +4 of Fire)

[Tinydwarfman]

After trying out Iron Heroes during an interlude in our 3.5 campaign, my entire group decided to drop what we were doing and start a fresh campaign using Iron Heroes.

It's utterly fantastic. It takes the emphasis off of "stuff" and puts it more on the character, by using skills and feats.

It's got mechanics to say, handle a archer creating a on-the-fly arrow ladder, for the harrier to climb, leap off and drive a sword though someone while tumbling past.

I'm actually working on converting some old 2nd edition Forgotten Realms modules using True Sorcery as the magic system.

see here

Mind you, it does require a couple tweak...the armigar or weaponsmaster (can't remember which off-hand) require a bit of tweaking to get right.

I've also had no difficultly using monsters from any of the 3.5 MM's, but you have to take into account that magic items to overcome DR don't exist (or are so rare they might as well not exist) and that some encounters are actually harder then the CR listed (any flying creature immediately makes the encounter more difficult, no more magic missles, or Composite Longbows +4 of Fire)

The weapon-master actually has the easiest fix in history. Just cross out the line that says "You can change to a new target once per round as a free
action, but you lose any tokens you have built up against the
original target"

[Swordgleam]

The weapon-master actually has the easiest fix in history. Just cross out the line that says "You can change to a new target once per round as a free
action, but you lose any tokens you have built up against the
original target"

That part did look silly to me.

Of course, my character is a Man-At-Arms, so my goal in life is to prove that anything a weapons master can do, I can do better, and in more ways, while looking more stylish.

[Nero24200]

Importing other elements (such as magica nd certain monsters) can be done and are compatable, but should be done with care. A momster with a SLA that deals damage is alot more managable to an Iron Heroes party than a medusa with the Stone Gaze ability. Remember that without magic the heroes also don't have a magical means of overcomming problems, such as petrification, loss of limbs etc.

They can be done, but remember to compensate. For instance, maybe allowing a ritual or some such that can reverse petrification.

Additionally, magic casting classes can be added, but some work may be needed.

[Gametime]

I also hate the magic system. I suggest This. It's a far better system, I actually like it more than the D&D magic system. It does need a little filling out though.

I actually liked the magic system in general. Most of the schools seemed pleasantly broad; it's just that evocation really is terrible. It's just like D&D's evocation, except you'll do 10d6 damage at level 20 instead of 20d6, and you can only do it like 7 times per day, and there's an unreasonably high chance that you'll blow yourself up instead.

In general, I like the idea of magic that rewards you for using only as much of a resource as you need to, though I'm not sure how well the system would work in practice. (I'm also a bit confused about the channeling DC, since it says your int modifier increases it - why does being more intelligent make it harder for you to cast spells?)

[Tinydwarfman]

I actually liked the magic system in general. Most of the schools seemed pleasantly broad; it's just that evocation really is terrible. It's just like D&D's evocation, except you'll do 10d6 damage at level 20 instead of 20d6, and you can only do it like 7 times per day, and there's an unreasonably high chance that you'll blow yourself up instead.

In general, I like the idea of magic that rewards you for using only as much of a resource as you need to, though I'm not sure how well the system would work in practice. (I'm also a bit confused about the channeling DC, since it says your int modifier increases it - why does being more intelligent make it harder for you to cast spells?)

Because smart people think about the system too much and get migraines . (In actuality the developers just threw it together the last minute after play testers wanted some kind of magic. I think it was fixed in the errata.)

I find the spells range from mostly ridiculously bad to the occasional broken good, and the entire thing just seems unfinished. The spell selection reminds me of the base GURPS selection, there are way too few spells, although they are quite broad in scope.

[Hurlbut]

When converting monsters to IH, if they have abilities that require a DC, you increase that by 2 to account for the higher saving throws. Outsiders cause corruption. You need to keep up the theme that magic is dangerous if that's what you want, so you need to play up the alieness of even simple magical creatures.

Further more, you can keep magic items relevant to the villains/monsters that use them and make them useless or at least very dangerous to the heroes if they tried to use them. You can apply this to all magic items that exist in your setting; potions have drawbacks like being addictive or causing mutations, or simple ones like having -4 Int/-4Cha in addition to +4 strength for Bull's Strength potion or -4 Dex in addition to +4 Con for Bear's Endurance. I recommend 'Mastering Iron Heroes'.

If you can get your hand on Issue #358 of Dragon Magazine, I recommend the article 'Master's Forge'. It's an excellent way to add properties to masterwork armors and weapons without going magical for any sort of bonus/special property.

[Gametime]

Thanks for the advice! Are there any problems with the system itself I should be aware of? (Magic notwithstanding, since I don't think the PCs will have access to magic.) Are any of the classes or feats notoriously borked one way or the other? A quick scan doesn't reveal any obvious problems, but I'm not sure how the different token mechanics match up in play.

[awa]

the classes arnt really balanced but not nearly as bad as 3.5 so take that what you will. The one thing some might not like is the system is not as simple as dungeons and dragons working with the tokens to get the most out of things is hard for some pepole

[Swordgleam]

If tokens are too confusing for someone, there's a couple of classes that don't use them much. One of these is the man-at-arms, but I would suggest not giving it to newbies - it's a ton of fun if you care even slightly about optimizing, but it's pretty easy to make yourself useless if you don't.

[Piedmon_Sama]

This seems like a good place to ask--what's the power-setting on Iron Heroes? Is it like D&D, where your PCs will be unstoppable vs armies of normal guys by 8th level, or is there more risk put into combat now? Can you still have characters doing impossible feats just by putting lots of ranks into jump, balance, climb and tumble? Is it possible to instantly kill a high-level character with a lucky or called shot?

[awa]

If an army consists of level 1 commoners then yes definitely particularly becuase armor is damage reduction a armiger (the armor specialist) could make himself basically untouchable it might take him all week to kill them all but he can do it.

Its not particularly hard to get superhuman skill checks just like dungeons and dragon.

Its hard to one shot high level characters becuase they tend to have more hit points then their dnd counterparts and lack casters with save or die. that said you could abuse power attack and mounted combat and cause damage comparable to what a 3.5 charecter could do which can get quite high

(added later)
In theory a iron hero's charecter should be better then a regular pc with out items and in turns of skills and hit points it's almost certainly true so in theory the power level is about the same. (although in practice no full casters means the power level is far lower)

[Dienekes]

As someone interested in starting a game, what are the imbalances in the game?

I know of the Weapon Master from up top, but what are the tier listings? Or at least what's better than others, and what's worse, and why.

[porpentine]

Dienekes, OP & others -

I can wholeheartedly recommend Iron Heroes: it's got a lot going for it, especially if (as so many are) you've been playing 3.5 for awhile, don't like the look of 4.0 and want an alternative with a shallow learning curve.

Balance issues:

(1) the Archer, Berseker, Harrier, Man-at-Arms and Weaponmaster are all punchy and I suppose well balanced in that sense. The Weaponmaster is rather dull to play, however, and needs tweaking in that regard.

The other classes fall behind the pack, or (in the case of the magic classes) are crazily out of sync - hopelessly uber in the hands of an optimiser, and exhaustingly complex for anyone else. The OP has said he doesn't want magic, so that leaves the Armiger, Weaponmaster and Player's Companion melee classes to sort out (the PC includes the Myrmidon, which is again interesting but sub-par)

(2) Traits are lovely, but some are almost must-takes. The clearest-cut example is Weapon Bond, which is likely to appear multiple times in most parties. Hot on its heels may be Mighty Build and Tall. These three may need a look at.

(3) The feat mastery system is excellent. There are some imbalances, but nothing you won't be able to correct in play as long as your players are aware of the need for on-the-road tinkering.

Those aside, have a ball - IH is really great fun :)

[bbugg]

I quite enjoy IH. The magic is pretty silly - I'll not use it. I think we're exploring the True Sorcery magic system to use in IH. Personally, I'm fine with having a very low magic setting. Any magic there is, is pretty risky or just plain evil.

Monsters port well into IH as discussed by others, just be careful of SA and DR. I just threw a gargoyle (DR10) (and several other things) against 2 lvl 4 characters. It took them a while to cut through the DR, but worked just fine. In my mind, that's the way DR should work - you should have to put your hardest hitting guy against him and whack away - you should not try every fancy weapon you have until something seems to work. But that's the whole point of IH - it's the character that's important, not the stuff.

As for the bestiary, I don't like it. They're mostly magic twisted monsters left over from a long lost magic war. Or horrible magical mutants. It has a very post-apocolyptic feel that I don't like in my fantasy. You may like it but I'm planning on sticking to D&D monsters.
The book isn't all bad though - one of my favourite things about IH (as a DM) is the villian classes. My biggest pet peeve about D20 is that it takes an hour to make a high-(or even mid-) level opponent and you're never going to use half of the work. Villian classes make it simple and quick. Now, I haven't yet used the ones in the bestiary, but I'm glad I have access to them.

[suburbanarcanist]

IH is quite fun. Some more potential fixes are available at http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/ih/ , and some decent homebrew stuff is available at http://www.iron-league.com/index.cfm .

Re: Magic: yeah, the default system was not so great. I like the looks of the one previously linked to; thanks! Now I'll have to decide whether to use that or True Sorcery (of which I am a fan), though...

Re: Post-Apocalyptic: One campaign I played in was actually set in the ruins of Atlanta. We had a Canadian Mighty Build Berserker armed with a huge greatsword fashioned from a helicopter blade, an Armiger from the Steel Clans of Pittsburgh, a radiation-channeling Arcanist, an Executioner, and a Mighty Build Tall mutant Pikemaster (who combined Tall with Hafted Weapon Mastery to get excellent area control). We might've had an Archer, too, but I don't remember. 'twas a good time, though the Executioner and Armiger had disappointingly low damage output compared to the mightily-built melee.