|
Post by borderprince on Aug 30, 2018 7:38:52 GMT
Although IKRPG is same as most games, that you need to be a spellcaster or all you can do is either attack or move in the battle, but at least it have some kind of resource management.... Or use a battle plan if you build with the appropriate careers. Some archetype abilities also let you do shenanigans in combat (Unconvential Warfare, for example), but involve discussion with the GM rather than their implementation being build into the rules.
True, but warcasters in particular are often strapped for resources, at least until the higher levels.
To the original poster - the Iron Kingdoms Role Playing Game forum on the official Privateer Press forums is fairly active and has good discussions. Definitely worth looking there.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Aug 30, 2018 7:53:14 GMT
Actually it is only salvageable forum in PP forum now, even consider the disaster that creates lormahordes.
|
|
boozy
Junior Strategist
Posts: 429
|
Post by boozy on Aug 31, 2018 3:12:11 GMT
I'm mastering IKRPG to a group of RPG fanatics who spent most of their lives playing D&D, Vampire, Chtulu, Girsa, etc... And they are having a blast with it. I've played and ran the majority of systems released since the 80's, and IKRPG is perfect for the tastes of most tabletop RPG players. It's light on formal mechanisms of RP and character development, but frankly that's usually something that most players and Storytellers are fine with. Where I think IKRPG shines is in its tight rules and tactile interaction. Having a visual and physically interactive mechanism is very good for getting players to buy in and engage in the momemt.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Aug 31, 2018 5:21:28 GMT
Ikrpg is a good system, but it has issues. Namely too much focus on combat and not enough social mechanics and lack of published adventures. Jacks also kinda suck balls. Eh... Lack of social mechanics is a feature and not a bug in some circles. Maybe, but IMO just being a Murder-hobo is no fun at all.
Sadly the IKRPG right now is more of a combat simulator where your group controls a unit of heroes who just wander aimlessly from one battle to the next, amassing experience and loot.
It gets better if the GM puts a lot of work into it. The problem is the GM has to put A LOT of work into it. You have to make your campaigns 100% from scratch in addition to adding more social orientated rules and mechanics, as well as fixing the borked up crafting rules if your players are into that. The gear catalog is also lacking in basic odds and ends and is just too heavily weighted towards combat gear. The Iron Kingdoms uses the same Copper/Silver/Gold currency system that DnD uses too, but not a single item in the book has a price in something thats not gold coins. Heck, we are even given an exchange chart between the different nations because some of their coins have different values, or don't have an equivalent in other nations. But nothing uses anything but gold coins -_-
Expanding on how jacks are kinda underpowered.
First off, jacks are hideously expensive to purchase and repair. The basic Laborjack you can start with is also very fragile, they're basically made of tissue paper. Sure, you can scrounge some supplies to repair light damage for free, but since even the wimpiest of bad guys is going to put some large holes in your jack it only goes so far, and its easy to get some crits on the important systems. Plus this crappy laborjack can't hit the broadside of a barn so it doesn't even contribute well to combat because of Mat3 *sad trombone*. The pow of Jack weapons isn't even any higher. You're looking at pow12-13 for a laborjack with a makeshift spear, which is worse than most combat PCs can have right out of the gate. And you can easily have several thousand gold worth of damage in even minor tussles. One guy with a handcannon or a two handed sword can make short work of a laborjack.
The main reason for these issues I think is that PP did a 1:1 conversion for jacks from the wargame to the RPG. Yeah, the same jack in the RPG has the same stats as it does in WMH, it just gets a couple extra stats. same damage grid, same armor, same defense. Unlike other characters who get some serious stat boosts vs what they'd be in WMH.
The basic system itself is fine. They just need to put some more effort into fleshing out the game mechanics and getting us some published adventures. Its easier to homebrew adventures if you have some existing ones to draw inspiration from rather then doing it all from scratch.
hopefully we get a big book of adventures sometime, along with a book of expanded mechanics, crafting, and basic sundries. I really want this RPG to be a great one. but right now its too bloated on the career and combat areas and not enough adventure modules and game mechanics.
|
|
|
Post by The Snark Knight on Aug 31, 2018 13:12:38 GMT
Maybe, but IMO just being a Murder-hobo is no fun at all. True, but that's not really what I mean. I find that if your players, especially experienced ones, are open to solving problems through nonviolent means... As a GM it's really not that hard to make that happen without a ruleset that holds their hand through every step of the process. You can easily just roleplay your way through the whole encounter and roll dice where appropriate. And sure, there are a handful of great systems that that have really solid rules for social encounters, and I'm always grateful to have them, especially with newer players or players new to roleplaying... But that said, there are always times when the social encounter ruleset feels unnecessary or even downright gets in the way of good roleplaying. So yeah, your mileage may vary, and it definitely involves a social contract between everyone at the table. It's a weird concept for some people and I'm always confused by it. I regularly have entire sessions with no combat and still everyone stays in character for the duration. Some times no dice are rolled and the characters all sit around shooting the shit. I promise it works.
|
|
|
Post by gargs454 on Aug 31, 2018 15:26:37 GMT
Eh... Lack of social mechanics is a feature and not a bug in some circles. It gets better if the GM puts a lot of work into it. The problem is the GM has to put A LOT of work into it. You have to make your campaigns 100% from scratch in addition to adding more social orientated rules and mechanics, as well as fixing the borked up crafting rules if your players are into that. The gear catalog is also lacking in basic odds and ends and is just too heavily weighted towards combat gear. The Iron Kingdoms uses the same Copper/Silver/Gold currency system that DnD uses too, but not a single item in the book has a price in something thats not gold coins. Heck, we are even given an exchange chart between the different nations because some of their coins have different values, or don't have an equivalent in other nations. But nothing uses anything but gold coins -_-
Expanding on how jacks are kinda underpowered.
First off, jacks are hideously expensive to purchase and repair. The basic Laborjack you can start with is also very fragile, they're basically made of tissue paper. Sure, you can scrounge some supplies to repair light damage for free, but since even the wimpiest of bad guys is going to put some large holes in your jack it only goes so far, and its easy to get some crits on the important systems. Plus this crappy laborjack can't hit the broadside of a barn so it doesn't even contribute well to combat because of Mat3 *sad trombone*. The pow of Jack weapons isn't even any higher. You're looking at pow12-13 for a laborjack with a makeshift spear, which is worse than most combat PCs can have right out of the gate. And you can easily have several thousand gold worth of damage in even minor tussles. One guy with a handcannon or a two handed sword can make short work of a laborjack.
Honestly, I've always found that "social rules" in RPGs are extremely group-dependent. A lot of groups, as stated, just don't care about the social skills and simply want to "Hulk Smash!". Others love it. The rules are there in IKRPG if you want to roleplay your way through an encounter as opposed to simply bashing your way through it. Its just a matter of whether or not the group and GM want to allow for it. As an example, I've GM'd D&D since 3.0, Pathfinder, played IKRPG, Shadowrun, etc., etc. Pretty much all of them have their options but a lot depends on the GM. In D&D 3.x for instance, as a GM, I found that building a good, engaging, and balanced-challenging encounter took a fair amount of time and prep on my part. On the other hand, a "social" encounter was easy. Just put in an NPC and have them start off the encounter talking rather than fighting. Roll some bluff, sense motive, and/or diplomacy, etc. and you are home free. As a result, if I found myself needing to throw in something extra relatively quickly, it was usually a social encounter because it was easy. In 4.0ed on the other hand, combat encounters were really easy to design as a GM and I found that I could even design them on the fly without much worry. As a result, I, and a lot of GMs I knew, would toss in an extra combat if they needed some filler because combat, at least in our groups, was perceived as "fun" (at least at early levels). The result though was a lot of people saying there was no RPing in 4th ed. "The rules don't encourage it." etc. Yet, there was an entire section of the book and ruleset devoted to more engaging "social/skill" encounters. The problem though was a lot of groups treated skill challenges (and yes there were issues especially early on with the rules) the same way they treated combat encounters. They tried to min max them. The player with +4 to Diplomacy kept her mouth shut because another had +5 which was obviously MUCH better. Etc., etc. They just rolled dice rather than actually role play. No matter that a good GM would almost always award bonuses to players who did great role play. So in short, I think that IKRPG is largely the same. There may not be a huge structure formulated for social interactions, but the skills are certainly there and the system is set up to allow for it. Its not required, but it is there imho. That said, I certainly agree with you on warjacks, they simply are not worth it as written and would require a fair amount of house ruling to properly balance them. I also think that the general lack published adventures doesn't help. There are some, but not many. What's worse is that some have some weird issues with regard to skills. I know there was a series of adventures published in NQ and every single one of them had at least one encounter where it was strongly suggested that the players use "Forensics". The problem? At the time only one career had access to the skill. Not exactly ideal.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Aug 31, 2018 17:20:24 GMT
Maybe, but IMO just being a Murder-hobo is no fun at all. True, but that's not really what I mean. I find that if your players, especially experienced ones, are open to solving problems through nonviolent means... As a GM it's really not that hard to make that happen without a ruleset that holds their hand through every step of the process. You can easily just roleplay your way through the whole encounter and roll dice where appropriate. And sure, there are a handful of great systems that that have really solid rules for social encounters, and I'm always grateful to have them, especially with newer players or players new to roleplaying... But that said, there are always times when the social encounter ruleset feels unnecessary or even downright gets in the way of good roleplaying. So yeah, your mileage may vary, and it definitely involves a social contract between everyone at the table. It's a weird concept for some people and I'm always confused by it. I regularly have entire sessions with no combat and still everyone stays in character for the duration. Some times no dice are rolled and the characters all sit around shooting the shit. I promise it works. That’s all well and good, but again it’s too much reliance on the GM starting from scratch. We really need some framework to build upon instead of the vast nothingness we have now. As a GM, I don’t want to spend all my time figuring out new game mechanics on top of designing the adventure.
|
|
|
Post by The Snark Knight on Aug 31, 2018 17:45:04 GMT
That’s all well and good, but again it’s too much reliance on the GM starting from scratch. We really need some framework to build upon instead of the vast nothingness we have now. As a GM, I don’t want to spend all my time figuring out new game mechanics on top of designing the adventure. I have created zero new game mechanics. You can get through basically any social encounter imaginable using a series of skill rolls.
|
|
|
Post by deathbymelancholy on Aug 31, 2018 19:52:31 GMT
Beermachine did some RPG podcasts if you want to listen to a campaign run by a great GM and some truly awful players. Might give you at least some idea about what you get.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Aug 31, 2018 20:27:55 GMT
That’s all well and good, but again it’s too much reliance on the GM starting from scratch. We really need some framework to build upon instead of the vast nothingness we have now. As a GM, I don’t want to spend all my time figuring out new game mechanics on top of designing the adventure. I have created zero new game mechanics. You can get through basically any social encounter imaginable using a series of skill rolls. Yea, I never felt the system lacked for Social skill mechanics, and I ran an adventure where a party had to navigate through the web of intrigue of the Admirals in Five Fingers. The fact that you can create something like a gentleman Aristocrat/Investigator is great for RP opportunities.
|
|
faelin
Junior Strategist
Posts: 121
|
Post by faelin on Aug 31, 2018 23:09:48 GMT
How do the military warjacks that they released in NQ stack up? Are they stronger? Does anyone have the issue numbers that Included them?
|
|
|
Post by The Snark Knight on Sept 1, 2018 1:06:07 GMT
No Quarter #66 has got some suggested fixes for warjacks that work pretty well.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Sept 1, 2018 4:34:13 GMT
How do the military warjacks that they released in NQ stack up? Are they stronger? Does anyone have the issue numbers that Included them? Are they the same ones as in Kings, Nations and Gods? Or have there been updates since then?
If its the same ones, well. They are better simply by virtue of having good Mat, Rat, and armor values. The thing is if a group is at the level where they can afford to have some military surplus/stolen/blackmarket Warjacks they're fighting stuff that will still rip those jacks a new exhaust pipe.
If I were to fix Jacks in general, I would do a few things.
1) All jacks would use double damage grids and have roughly double their current hit points. Jacks would also gain 1-3 points of armor.
2) At the end of a fight in which a Jack's system was disabled, the operator would have to make a repair check for each system to see if the damage sustained was minor or a critical. IE: representing a system diagnostic/emergency repair to salvage the system. A repair check with a target value of 12 with a -2 penalty for each crit the system is currently suffering. For each point the roll scores above 12, 1 damage box of that system is repaired. If the roll is equal to or less than 12, the system suffers a roll on the Crit chart.
3) Jacks would gain an additional damage die vs anything of a smaller size OR some extra pow/strength.
So it would be harder for Jack systems to suffer critical damage and you'd get 1 free attempt to fix each system per battle, plus any regular repair checks. This would make jacks a little more resilient so that one fight isn't going to knock a jack out completely. Jacks would also have more hit points, armor, and some extra damage so they have a benefit to being so expensive to maintain.
|
|