|
We've all read and talked about how the Star Wars Saga edition is said to be a foreshadowing of D&D 4E and discussed what that might mean.
I'm curious what the Iron Heroes connection is. We've probably all heard that Iron Heroes is also in the ballpark of where 4E is headed. Unfortunately, since I know very little ABOUT Iron Heroes, I don't know what that means for 4E. I know it came from the mind of Monte Cooke, which is a pretty huge ringing endorsement for it since that guy is a game design genius. I know Mike Mearls worked with Monte on a number of Malhavoc projects including Iron Heroes, so there would certainly seem to be a logical connection.
So, has anyone played Iron Heroes or at least read through the book(s)? What do you think? How could this affect the way D&D 4E develops?
Iron Heroes largely removes the need for magic items from the game. It also moves the focus of a character's power to different feat trees, with each class having mastery in different areas.
For example, the Armiger gets the best access to the various Armor feat trees. You must meet a feats mastery level in order to select it. As a result, the can improved their Defense bonuses from shileds or Armor DR (armor provides DR and the classes each have a class Defense bonus similar to d20 Modern).
Typically, each class gets excellent access to one feat group, good access to a second, fair to a third, and poor access to all others. As a result, characters with the same class can have a wider range of abilities between them.
The suggested setting (little more than some basic ideas) also uses the "points of light" idea.
Mike Mearls is the primary author of Iron Heroes and Monte Cooke was given credit for "creative design", which I would guess to mean that he and Mearls talked over some concepts which Mearls breathed the life into.
I suspect Monte Cooke has been a bigger force behind 4e than most people suspect. If you're a reader of his blog and essays, a lot of the 4e changes announced are things that he has discussed over the past year. Among the designers and developers are guys that respect him, and he talks about visiting WOTC for them to bounce ideas off of up to and including just before the GENCON announcement.
Having played in Monte's campaign, maybe Erik Mona might recognize some elements of 4e having come from there (once its published).
|
Hmmm, if this is the case, then that makes me feel a little better about 4E. I thought Iron Heroes was a really interesting system. When my group first got together, that is the system we used in one guy's homebrew. Later we switch over to 3.5 so we could run AoW. I still have the books for IH though.
The Feat system was different, but what I really liked was the skills. They put them in skill groups, making it much easier to build up ranks. It was a very low-magic setting though, and spellcaster's had a particularly difficult time of casting.
|
|
Interesting ... I will have to pick up these books (how many are there, by the way?) I'm actually a BIG fan of low magic games, so this sounds good.
It also fits with some things in the WOTC designer blogs about making a character less about what magic items he has and more about the character himself. I kind of like that as well.
The only Monte thing that confuses me is in one of HIS blogs on his site from a year or so ago, he said something to the effect that he would hope 4E is a number of years away. If it came out sooner (as in, pretty much what is actually happening) he felt it would be a pretty clear indication that Wizards and / or Hasbro just wanted to milk as much money from D&D as possible and then dump it. I'm paraphrasing here, but that was the jist as I remember it. I guess that doesn't preclude him from talking over 4E ideas with the designers (and if he is, it can only be a GOOD thing) but it is something to think about.
Back to Iron Heroes, though - have there been any indications what aspets of it are most likely to find their way into the new D&D?
Contributor
|
I know it came from the mind of Monte Cooke, which is a pretty huge ringing endorsement for it since that guy is a game design genius. I know Mike Mearls worked with Monte on a number of Malhavoc projects including Iron Heroes, so there would certainly seem to be a logical connection.
Although Monte or Mearls could verify for sure, I'm pretty sure Iron Heroes came from Mearls's mind, although undoubtedly Monte helped him come up with some ideas.
I guess that doesn't preclude him from talking over 4E ideas with the designers (and if he is, it can only be a GOOD thing) but it is something to think about.
I would be shocked, amazed, and beside myself if the 4e R&D team consulted Monte about anything.
Back to Iron Heroes, though - have there been any indications what aspets of it are most likely to find their way into the new D&D?
I've only browsed through IH, but my sense is that a concept similar to skill groups is making its way into 4E. Also, environmental hazards and terrain challenges seem to have a role in 4E. I wouldn't be surprised if ideas from IH character classes migrate to 4E. For example, in IH the longer the archer class aims the greater damage the arrow does when it hits -- if the ranger fills the role of high-damage "striker", as I've read, they might have a similar ability. (I get all my info off ENWorld, which is a great clearing house for 4E news.)
I would be shocked, amazed, and beside myself if the 4e R&D team consulted Monte about anything.There's a story behind that statement. I am not asking, just pointing it out...
yeah Mike, you can't just make a comment like that and then leave us hanging.
|
|
I guess that doesn't preclude him from talking over 4E ideas with the designers (and if he is, it can only be a GOOD thing) but it is something to think about.
I got the idea from his blog posts that the reason he flew out to Seattle is because Monte sits on the directing board for Gleemax. I am not sure he really had much in the way of input towards 4e. Actually, at the Monte Q&A at Gencon he said knew as much about 4e as the rest of us.
I played in an Iron Heroes campaign and it was very enjoyable. A breath of fresh air in the D&D corpus, really, and not just because it's perfectly suited for a Conan-like setting. IH had some interesting innovations including terrain challenges, spur-of-the-moment combat feats (in which you and the DM could set the challenge level), an intricate ability tree that negated the need for the "Christmas Tree" of magic items, a really gritty low-magic feel, ability tokens that you could use to invoke special feats based on trigger conditions, and other tactical goodies. It made combat very interesting without turning it into a miniatures wargame, a surprising accomplishment (I hate wargaming, but I liked this system).
I can see a lot of similarity between Iron Heroes and the new 4E, but that's a given since Mike Mearls is on the primary WotC design team. I don't think 4E will come out as well as IH did though because with IH Mike Mearls had a blank slate to work with, while D&D imposes a lot of restrictions because of its history.
I would be shocked, amazed, and beside myself if the 4e R&D team consulted Monte about anything.
Monte Cook has definitely said that he is not officially involved in any way with developing 4e. But given his relationship with Chris Perkins, Bruce Cordell and Mike Mearls, wouldn't it make sense for them to mine their history together for ideas, even if its not active involvement? For example, Monte's Just One More Thing Before I Go... sounds really close to some of the info released on 4e spellcasting. He did another essay on grading feats to allow some advancement every level. His blog entry on meeting with WOTC just before GENCON has a between-the-lines "interesting times coming, it's not my fault" sense that makes me think that,at that point, he knew 4e was imminent, or at least the Gleemax related component.
His prediction (in 2006?) about the coming of 4e is just, well eerie. And I hope that WOTC has read it and his thoughts on the OGL.
Basically, I think Monte Cooke is a smart guy and a real good game designer. Some of the guys designing 4e will hopefully take advantage of their history with him to incorporate some of his ideas, whether from with Mike in Iron Heroes, other Malhovac products or his personal campaigns.
Just wanted to clarify what I meant earlier.
yeah Mike, you can't just make a comment like that and then leave us hanging.But it's so much more fun (for me) if I do. :D
Of course, sometimes its fun to spill the beans. And we can keep a secret... ;)
|
|
Mike Mearls was the creative mind behind Iron Heroes. Monte Cook was still working on Ptolus during this time.
Iron Heroes is like an unpolished diamond because there are so many ideas and cool mechanics that needed errata or clarification. This was because Mike Mearls left Malhavoc Press to work with WoC.
That was about 2 years ago.
That was the time WoC started working on 4th edition.
The more I read of 4th edition, the more similarities I see to Iron Heroes.
Imo, Iron Heroes definitely has already many elements we will see in 4th.
- terrain rules
- independence from magic items
- everybody can do something every round
- stunts and skill challenges. Do cool things like jump over the orcs or run along a vertical wall.
- skillsytem uses skill groups. PCs use their skill points to get ranks in this group (eg. athletics group and you get ranks for swimming, jump etc.)
- Feat Chains (might also be from SAGA as Talent Trees).
The mechanics work fine (with the errata) in Iron Heroes, so they should also work in 4th.
|
|
As I understood it Mearls worked his way up the food chain from 3es get go. He practily wrote all the Fantasy Flights books and a plethora of other stuff including Dragon and Dungeon. Then he finally hooked up at Malhavoc, this was with the intention of getting a gig a WotC in the future. In the mean time he did the Book of Iron Might. While a prelude to Iron Heroes it seemed to be a test run for a seperate and completely new system that Iron Heroes became.
4e has Mearls finger prints all over it,not a bad thing if you ask me.Im sure the designers have considered Monte Cooks ideas, but wouldnt be surprised if they ran in other directions that he himself would not have gone. I dont think they have consulted with Monte himself, but as friends Im sure they are all well aware of his design philosophy and blogs posts.
Didn't Malhavoc sell Iron Heroes to another company? Would that limit Mearls' ability to use ideas from his own book? I wonder if WOTC has to limit comparison to Iron Heroes for legal reasons and therefore would play up the TOB connection instead. I would prefer 4e to be based more on Iron Heroes style than TOB if possible (ever since Fatespinner's description of a theoretical 4e battle scene "Power Ranger-style" in another thread, I've been having nightmares).
|
|
Didn't Malhavoc sell Iron Heroes to another company? Would that limit Mearls' ability to use ideas from his own book? I wonder if WOTC has to limit comparison to Iron Heroes for legal reasons and therefore would play up the TOB connection instead. I would prefer 4e to be based more on Iron Heroes style than TOB if possible (ever since Fatespinner's description of a theoretical 4e battle scene "Power Ranger-style" in another thread, I've been having nightmares).
Monte sold Iron Heroes to Adam Windsor, one of the Playtesters for IH. Fiery Dragon publishes IH.
For more Info see: http://www.fierydragon.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&i d=72&Itemid=45
Also I do not think that Mike Mearls copy his own stuff. IH is different to D&D 3x in may aspects and 4th edition will be different to 3x in may aspects.
So I expect Mike Mearls to use some of his cool ideas and port them over and change them to fix the 4th edition context.
I play IH almost exclusively now. My group and I love the rules and Mike Mearls involvement in 4e is what makes me sure to at least grab the new PH for review.
If someone came out and said that 4e was built off Iron Heroes with a well integrated magic system... I'd be very happy. It's not perfect (nothing is) but it addresses three critical issued I have with D&D:
1. Armor class - it grants a Base Defense Bonus that improves with level advancement and remands Armor to damage reduction where it belongs (imho)
2. Support Characters - there are none, everyone is a star. No one is stuck as the buff class or the healer - everyone has a distinct role, but everyone kicks butt. Some classes are broken, but Mearls gets an A++ for effort.
3. Christmas Tree syndrome - you are the hero, not the meat puppet for a horde of magic items. I have never ever enjoyed the D&D necessity for magic items.
And I too am seeing more and more cool IH stuff creeping into the rules announcements for 4E - naturally I get indignant on IH's behalf, "That's not new, I use that in my game every week!"
I was reading about Villain Classes in "Mastering Iron Heroes" by Mike Mearls. I wonder if some of the ideas about speeding encounter creation for DM's in 4e will be based on something similar. Has anyone actually used Villain classes in their campaign? Does it make encounters seem repetitive?