NQ 42 RPG Preview! Get Hype!

[Weaselcreature]

So on the offchance that Privateer doesn't include sufficient non-adventuring careers for your taste, you should be able to homebrew one.

There you go.

All that is (seemingly) accurate, but it would be nicer if PP put thought and framework into the RP aspect of the game. That way it's going to be built in and balanced for their creation, and will be the same for different gaming groups.

And they may have, considering we have relatively little info on the product so far.

[Haugfather]

I was surprised to see the multiple career thing as a method for advancement (I also see it being tied to the Veteran and Elite "tiers") but I wonder if there will be "advanced" careers? For instance, if you look at someone who is undoubtedly Elite like The Butcher, what 4 careers would he have?
Warcaster - Soldier - Officer - Violent Deranged Psychopath?

I could see in instances where someone wanted to specialize there may be "prestige" careers like Warcaster II or similar. Just a thought.

[Sosthenes]

That would imply a pretty Warhammer-like system, where all "leveling up" is within the career framework, as opposed to e.g. careers "opening up" certain skills and traits, but allowing more free-form advancement within those constraints. Does our existing information imply the former?

[jdripley]

Honestly our existing information doesn't imply an awful lot

One day in a brave new future we'll know how it all works! Oh! For that day to come!

I guess I kindof hope that you don't have to keep adding on new careers every so often, but rather that you have the option of advancing within your career or expanding into a new one. If you're forced to add on new careers, then you'll run into the D&D Fighter issue... Around level 10ish, all of the fighters start to look exactly the same, because there's only a few really really good feats, and every fighter takes them. So even if you took a few oddball feats, you start running out of viable oddball feats and you've got to take the classic choices. I'm not pumped about that being the same way in IKRPG2 for ALL classes - i.e. there's a few careers that are just "the good ones" if you're a combat-oriented character, or same for any other archetype... so that in the end all of the "I'm a rogue" types have the same careers eventually, for example. I'm excited about combining them - but I'm also excited about having to really think about the combinations, as opposed to saying "eh, I'll get to that one eventually."

But, too early to start getting worried about it. Hard to make the call on how one thing will play out when you really only know that one thing!

[StJason]

Honestly our existing information doesn't imply an awful lot

One day in a brave new future we'll know how it all works! Oh! For that day to come!

Heh. Rampant speculation? Remember the days pre-Character Guide release? Remember the Yahoogroup?

[The Happy Anarchist]

That would be an interesting development. Adding careers as a form of levelling up - would depend heavily on how it is done, but at least it is different.

@Sosthenes - I actually prefer a classless system myself, but I also see most people having a fairly good idea of where they are going with their character and there is nothing wrong with that.

[Sosthenes]

That would be an interesting development. Adding careers as a form of levelling up - would depend heavily on how it is done, but at least it is different.

Well, we've got two big prior systems with careers, in one you don't level up, in one you add on careers, so doing it that way was always my base assumption. It does have some issues if you're expecting a higher granularity, leading to "Wizard I/II/II/IV" type of careers. But let's see how far you're advancing at all. It's a 2d6 system, so the granularity is probably a bit on the lower end of things.

@Sosthenes - I actually prefer a classless system myself, but I also see most people having a fairly good idea of where they are going with their character and there is nothing wrong with that.

Unless caught in my flights of self-importance, I wouldn't want to use the term "wrong" at all when it comes to gaming, but there are situations where the mechanical manifestation of that wish is a bit unfortunate. Having a very specific goal for your whole lvl 1-20 path in your head can lead to some clashes with the campaign or distract a lot from the role-playing aspect, as you need to align your chosen mechanical advances and their implications with what's actually going on at the table. But even that leaves quite some wiggle room, if that choice would've been made at lvl 1, it's certainly worse. I can do the Star Wars analogies, too: Let's imagine a system with "careers = life path" option, your Luke Skywalker player picked "Soldier / Starfighter Ace". Meeting Old Ben now has some issues. You've already made your choice, no "force" option for you. Hope your minmaxed yet mundane skills are enough to hit that shaft.

It's because of things like this that I prefer to have your stats reflect your past, not your future. And keep the penalty for changes as low as possible. Sure, you probably can't get in four years of Wizard college, but you might pick up some spells, and you definitely can learn to sneak and pickpocket a bit, even if you start out as Sir Rodderick, headchopper supreme.

As it seems that you can change/add careers, IKRPG2 seems to be somewhat flexible in that regard, although the whole Gifted deal still bothers me a bit.

[Lachlan the Mad]

I can do the Star Wars analogies, too: Let's imagine a system with "careers = life path" option, your Luke Skywalker player picked "Soldier / Starfighter Ace". Meeting Old Ben now has some issues. You've already made your choice, no "force" option for you. Hope your minmaxed yet mundane skills are enough to hit that shaft.

Someone's just described my first playthrough of KotOR...

[Top]

What I regret most in an RPG are mechanics which easily allow a PC to become so powerful it becomes comical. I came to dislike the 'packages' of the later editions of AD&D. I don't have any issues with accumulating skill and prowess in abilities but not to a point where a PC is only truly threatened by something 7 or 8 levels higher than he is.

From what I see in NQ#42 the IKRPG looks like it will be interesting, fun and new. I am definately looking forward to checking out the books when they hit the shelves.

[Psychomancer]

Heh. Rampant speculation? Remember the days pre-Character Guide release? Remember the Yahoogroup?

Oh. man, now you're just making me feel old.

[Keltheos]

Skimmed through it at the LGS last night. Very intrigued by what I saw, but realized it's such a small amount of the details (even though it is a good and long preview, ty, PP) that I'm just going to sit tight and bask in the cool when I grab the book at GenCon and read it fresh then.

[Keltheos]

Oh. man, now you're just making me feel old.

Remember the days when there was only the first adventure in the Witchfire Trilogy?

[StJason]

But you try and tell kids these days how good they have it... just try it! </old man voice>

[NavyGodzilla]

The article has made me very excited to play this RPG. One of the things I am very interested in is the possibility of seeing a warlock career in the first book. With the option to play Trollbloods we might see just a small option to build a warlock with one or two pets. Still though there is always book 3.

[Haugfather]

The article has made me very excited to play this RPG. One of the things I am very interested in is the possibility of seeing a warlock career in the first book. With the option to play Trollbloods we might see just a small option to build a warlock with one or two pets. Still though there is always book 3.

If Warcasters need to be Focusers would Warlocks need to be Furyers? Furiers? Furriers. Furries! Gods no!

[PPS_Dougseacat]

The warlock will not be in the first book. There's a lot of goodness in there, and it is going to be a weighty volume, but it is focused on the basic rules and adventuring possibilities most central and iconic to the setting within the human-dominated regions. A number of additional character options will be provided in the books that follow. There will not be the equivalent of an IKWG for the new RPG, but rather something like three, each exploring different aspects of the world and giving substantial playable content including character creation options.

This does mean to fully explore certain character concepts may require waiting until other books are out, but that's how these sorts of releases go--far too much content for a single book or even two! And we still have a lot of work to do finishing them. (Yes, we are actively working on them.) Even with Book 1, I think people will find the character creation affords tremendous flexibility. It's remarkable how much can be represented just by picking certain combinations of careers. But warlocks (and warbeasts) are a bit beyond this and will require quite a bit of dedicated space to do properly, better served for our later volume on the Wilds.

[usbprime]

Hey Doug.........what's the chance of seeing any IK stuff next weekend at lock and load?

[Mrpossum]

So, I got my first miniatures for Warmachine today (it's my birthday, actually, and I decided I wanted to try it out) and I thought about how compatible the miniatures are with the new rpg. With characters in the rpg having MAT and RAT and such, is it as easy as just dumping some miniatures from Warmachine into the rpg and use the stat card form Warmachine, or are some conversion work requires? Anyway, if that was possible, the Faction books for Warmachine and Hordes would be a gold mine for NPC stats.

Eirik

[jdripley]

Well we know that there are additional stats for RPG characters above and beyond what the tabletop game offers. BUT for combat purposes we know that MAT/RAT, DEF/ARM are still the main method of getting things done. And we don't yet know how stats will stack up - i.e. in the wargame we consider a MAT or RAT of 4 to be pretty awful and a MAT or RAT of 8 to be what the all-time best have. Will RPG characters have a similar stat range? Maybe, maybe not.

Once the game is released we'll be able to compare stats back and forth between the RPG and the wargames and see how they stack up and make judgements about how this or that model's stats stack up to RPG enemy's stats. I bet it would be pretty easy to take the stats of The Risen that Alexia Ciannor controls, and just take 2 or 3 of them, and make that low level encounter. Making your party face off against the Great Bears, or the Black Thirteenth, that's a different story all-together. And if you send them up against the Behemoth of the Avatar of Menoth, that is yet again a whole new level of trouble!

[gunslingerpro]

Making your party face off against the Great Bears, or the Black Thirteenth, that's a different story all-together. And if you send them up against the Behemoth of the Avatar of Menoth, that is yet again a whole new level of trouble!

Then again, the DeathJack was a feature in the first Monsternomicon. Sometimes throwing a LVL 19 at your early players is enough to scare them back into line

[jdripley]

Sure, the presence of more dangerous encounters is a given - what is an appropriate challenge is a different story. What I was trying to get at was that I think that Warmachine/Hordes stats will probably run the gamut of "low danger encounters" all the way up to "high danger encounters" and that with some experience with the system GMs will be able to get a feel for which ones are which.

[HerrDeux]

There will not be the equivalent of an IKWG for the new RPG, but rather something like three, each exploring different aspects of the world and giving substantial playable content including character creation options.

So, if the first book focuses on the 'human dominated kingdoms', and another one focuses on 'the Wilds', does the third focus on Rhul, Cryx and Ios, much like the last three were in a section at the back of the original IKWG?

[jdripley]

Book 1: General rules and basic world information - this is the "core"
Book 2: Detailed information on the Iron Kingdoms (Cygnar, Ord, Llael, Khador, Protectorate), presumably also with some new rules for characters that have to do with those areas.
Book 3: Detailed information on The Wilds (wilderness areas in/around the Kingdoms, and the races/factions that inhabit them), again presumably with new rules.
Book 4: Detailed information on The Other Stuff (Rhul, Ios, Cryx, the Skorne Empire) and again, presumably with new rules.

I'm just hoping that book two follows book 1 very closely. I want to dive into IKRPG2, but I don't want to have to retcon my adventures too much if I find out that book two had cooler ideas than I had regarding the specifics on the Kingdoms.

[Weaselcreature]

I thought I heard that books 1 & 2 were being released at the same time, but I can't remember for sure.

[jdripley]

If that's the case I need to re-instruct my ninjas!

[Chip]

Book 1: General rules and basic world information - this is the "core"
Book 2: Detailed information on the Iron Kingdoms (Cygnar, Ord, Llael, Khador, Protectorate), presumably also with some new rules for characters that have to do with those areas.
Book 3: Detailed information on The Wilds (wilderness areas in/around the Kingdoms, and the races/factions that inhabit them), again presumably with new rules.
Book 4: Detailed information on The Other Stuff (Rhul, Ios, Cryx, the Skorne Empire) and again, presumably with new rules.

I'm just hoping that book two follows book 1 very closely. I want to dive into IKRPG2, but I don't want to have to retcon my adventures too much if I find out that book two had cooler ideas than I had regarding the specifics on the Kingdoms.

I've been seeing this a lot, but it does make me wonder where the Monsternomicons are going to be coming in - are there going to be monsters in the main books, or is this an unknown at this point?

[AJ the Ronin]

I've been seeing this a lot, but it does make me wonder where the Monsternomicons are going to be coming in - are there going to be monsters in the main books, or is this an unknown at this point?

I made a thread about this and I get a typical non-answer from Simon.

[Chip]

Ahhh yeah, didn't see that. Well, I guess one of my bad guys having Farrow minions may or may not have to wait...

[jdripley]

So I've finally procured my copy of NQ#42, and here's my analysis:

Feat Points - it's not defined exactly what sort of "awesome thing in battle" will reward you with a feat point, but a brief look at what the feat points do tells me that they aren't over-the-top amazing. Rather they're a resource that you'll want to keep around for important moments. These remind me quite a bit of Action Points from the Eberron D&D setting. You won't win just because you have one - but when you're losing, they can pull your can out of the fire, or they can expedite a win. I think the whole feat point thing will be a big GM discretion issue no matter if they're awarded primarily for combat actions or roleplay actions.

"I'm concerned that careers are all about fighting - where are the role-play-centric careers?" - We still haven't seen a role-play-centric career, but my guess is that something like "spy" or whatnot would trend in that direction. However, they did spoil the Field Mechanik career. It's got plenty of combat oriented abilities and skills. Stuff to do with getting your 'jack to wreck face, keeping your 'jack in fighting form, as well as things to help you survive the whole thing yourself. But there's also some social things built into that career. Right off you have built in connections with others who are mechaniks, and you've got access to a workshop. You're good at negotiating.

Careers: just the two? How many do you get? - Seems like you start with two careers, and you can add three more over time. So my fears are alleviated - you won't be gaining new careers willy nilly and end-level characters will not all look the same simply because they've all ended up having to take all of the careers along the way.

Armor is way more expensive than weapons. They gave stats for one piece of armor and one weapon. They're essentially "equal" in that the armor gained by one is roughly equivalent to the damage that the other does - the weapon is less than half the cost of the armor.

Mechanika is very expensive. They gave stats for the Storm Glaive. It has similar stats to the other weapon shown, except that it can zap people from a short distance away. It's two orders of magnitude more expensive. So apparently zapping is super expensive.

Magic - Drives me nuts that they didn't give any sample Focus or Fatigue stats in this article!!! I'm assuming that low powered users of Focus will start with maybe 2 focus, and that it'll be only until the highest levels that you'll reach the 5-7 range that Warmachine Warcasters have. But.. what about the Will Weavers (yes, not will-workers, will weavers. They'll weave for food, but they won't work for food)? With no information on how quickly Fatigue fades it's hard to make a call about how these two methods balance. Fatigue basically runs like a d20 Sorcerer, where you have a list of spells you can cast, and a cost for each, and a total number (bit of a simplification). But is it a daily thing? In that case I'd want a pretty high Fatigue number relative to Focus. Is it a per-battle thing? Ok, I can be OK with a smaller number. Does fatigue regenerate during battle? Now that would be fun, especially if there was a bit of a random element to it, as you try to manage your fatigue while getting the most out of your spells. Can't wait to find out more on this.

[Sosthenes]

Whil Wheavers?

[Psychomancer]

Yes, well known geek blogger and icon Whil Wheavers, as seen on popular TV show Store Track the Flexed Numeration.

[PG_Kaptajn Congoboy]

It seems like my prayers were answered and it is (relatively) light on rules - at least core rules. Praise be to Menoth and/or the Ancestors.

[HerrDeux]

It's sad that apparently anyone wishing to play a Rhulfolk has to wait for Book Four. Boo-Hoo!

[PG_Enazel]

Basic rules for all the races will be in the core book (1), you just get more options and background stuff in the later ones.

[PG_Kaptajn Congoboy]

Yes, they even used a Rhulic character as an example in the last NQ, as I recall it?

[Whimper]

It seems like my prayers were answered and it is (relatively) light on rules - at least core rules. Praise be to Menoth and/or the Ancestors.

You were the one praying that the rules all go away? Curse you! I'm going to have to double my prayers to the Maiden of Gears that the rules be in place, running seamlessly in the background, ready to take the world in a new direction when you least expect it.

[Peg leg Pete]

there's a lot to read through on this thread (long posts and such), and i'm new to the party here, but something that jumped out to me was the ranges. Namely that everything is measured in inches. this seems natural in a normal table top game, but might become weird in an RPG.

now, i've been playing 4th edition D&D since it came out, which uses five-foot-squares, so that's not too different. The big concern for me is looking where i can go or what my ranges are before i do them. in most games, you know how far a target is from you before you shoot/cast a spell/jump a ravine, etc. either the GM tells you, or you look at a square/hex map and know innately. using inches implies griddless, miniature-based gaming which makes pre-measuring harder.

in the regular tabletop game, premeasuring is obviously not allowed, and the loss isn't as keenly felt. In an rpg, where you only have one character to concern yourself about, and it might be several minutes before you can act again (not to mention the guy who you are fighting doing their very best to kill you before you can), i would at least like to know if i have range before i try to do something.

all this being said, i'm more nervous than anything. the game still looks fun, and i want to try it out, but i am...concerned.

[DarkLegacy]

there's a lot to read through on this thread (long posts and such), and i'm new to the party here, but something that jumped out to me was the ranges. Namely that everything is measured in inches. this seems natural in a normal table top game, but might become weird in an RPG.

now, i've been playing 4th edition D&D since it came out, which uses five-foot-squares, so that's not too different. The big concern for me is looking where i can go or what my ranges are before i do them. in most games, you know how far a target is from you before you shoot/cast a spell/jump a ravine, etc. either the GM tells you, or you look at a square/hex map and know innately. using inches implies griddless, miniature-based gaming which makes pre-measuring harder.

in the regular tabletop game, premeasuring is obviously not allowed, and the loss isn't as keenly felt. In an rpg, where you only have one character to concern yourself about, and it might be several minutes before you can act again (not to mention the guy who you are fighting doing their very best to kill you before you can), i would at least like to know if i have range before i try to do something.

all this being said, i'm more nervous than anything. the game still looks fun, and i want to try it out, but i am...concerned.

Inches can still easily be converted into a grid format. It will hopefully be up to the playgroups. The 5' per square is still just a 5' to 1" conversion.

Also, I think a little realism in not knowing how far away you are from something to be rather neat. In the real world, we don't know ranges with a perfect accuracy without some of tools. Why would you character be any different?

Yes, I know i just applied real-world logic to a game.

[PPS_Simon]

Pre-measuring is allowed in the RPG. The grid conversion is doable but not recommended due to some weird things that start to occur on diagonals.

[Peg leg Pete]

that actually makes me feel a lot better.

how does the system do with a no-minutures-at-all format? for simpler combats, might it be easier to let the whole thing unfold in the imaginations of players?