Should Warcasters be "balanced"?

[Defenstrator]

One of the things that struck me from the IKRPG video was the remark that different careers will be balanced with one another, so that warcasters aren't the "best" choice. And I couldn't help but wonder, is that actually a good thing?

The impression I generally get about Warcasters is kind of like Jedi in Star Wars. Some are cooler than others, but if you hold that title there is no doubt, you are a formidable individual. And one of the neat things about a role playing game is that they don't actually have to be fair. Some individuals are scarier than others, just like npc monsters. If you as a schmoe run into Sorcha and flip her the bird, guess what, you're going to feel the pain and end up in frozen fragments.

This impression is reinforced by the miniature game where warcasters are almost always portrayed as pretty hardcore. The worst one in the game is a 3 point i.e. high level solo. And full warcasters are just the best models in the game . Even 4 or 5 point solos do not compare one on one vs even the weakest of warcasters or warlocks. So the idea that such people should be comparable to others seems to fly in the face of the established universe.

Do you think they should be "balanced"? Or should they be a higher level option? Or should warcasters be treated like Magi are in Ars Magica, focal characters that the rest of the game revolves around?

[Whimper]

Good topic for a thread, and I agree that Jedi are a valid comparison, especially given gamers reactions to the various ways they have been implemented in the Star Wars RPGs.

I think there should be no such thing as a "Level 1" warcaster. The word itself, like Jedi, carries associations with the most powerful individuals around. You can, however, imagine such a thing as a nacent warcaster. Someone whose inherent abilities and talents are just beginning to show within the context of whatever else it is they do.

Balance between PCs' "power levels" isn't strictly necessary in an RPG, since most teams find a way to appreciate every character in their way. But if the new IK RPG doesn't treat this with a great deal of care, you could see players feeling there's no reason to bother with being a bodger when an arcane mechanik can do everything better, and a warcaster can do everything best.

I don't think there was anything wrong with warcaster being a 'prestige class' in d20, except that the rules for those were never perfect. My ideal IK RPG would have warcasting talent be a series of progressions of power-- like a feat tree-- that anyone could access but never all at once.

[Sthiel]

I guess it depends on your deffinition of balanced - In my book a Warcaster is a very powerful, higher level character. I Agree there should be no such thing as a starter Warcaster, and the 'Prestige Class' concept worked well with my understanding of what Warcasters are.

So if you mean do I believe a Low level Warcaster should be on par with a low level fighter or a low level priest - Hell No. The lowest level Warcaster would be a lot more powerful than most starter characters - Warjacks, they command Warjacks.

Now if by balanced you mean It should take the same amount of effort to become a low Level (beginner) War caster as to become a medium or even higher level Trencher / Ironfang / Gunmage / whatever - then Yes they should be balanced.

[HerrDeux]

A warcaster is only a true bad a** with their armor and a 'jack to command. Catch them without those---or without some coal---they're nothing more than a higher level wizard, sorcerer or ArMk. Sometimes the big bad reputation just means you get neutralized first by the adversaries

It would seem illogical to allow a low level character become a warcaster. That would fly in the face of what we've come to know about the Iron Kingdoms. I seriously doubt it should even be a concern, as PP allowing that is not required to keep everyone happy. For those players who need to wield awesome power from the get-go, those campaigns should start at higher levels. For any campaigns starting at 1st level, a character would have the potential to become a warcaster. I like Whimper's suggestion of a Feat Tree---it deals with the issue of how fast can a character become a warcaster, and meshes with the IK fluff of requisite training.

[Yronhand]

I'm of the thinking that the performance we see in the games of Warcasters and Warlocks should be achieved later on in progression.

[PG_ThatRickGuy]

Heck, just look at the Journeyman Warcaster in the Cygnar army. 3 focus, tiny spell list, no jack points, and that's a Journeyman, someone who has completed their training, but it fresh out of school.

How well does a Journeyman hold up against a Man Hunter? Or a Mage Assassine? Or a Bane Thrall?

And like stated above, even a journeyman caster, with no army, and no jacks, is just a really limited mage or a fighter with a boost.

-Rick

[Sthiel]

I would assume a Warcaster has access to Jacks - its an integral part of the role. What good is a Wizard without a spell book, a Gunmage without a gun (probably closest analogy - but off by a huge factor), a Fighter without a weapon?

[PG_ThatRickGuy]

Warcasters have a lot more going for them than a jack. Most of them are going to be military trained, have government/noble connections, work well in leadership positions, not to mention the ability to boost their own performance and cast spells...

Having a jack is quite defining, but 90% of the time, having a jack is going to be more of a pain in the *** than not. That Jack isn't going to help at all while doing a dungeon crawl, and keeping that jack running means having a constant supply of coal and water.

-Rick

[John of Arc]

My question is this: What is it that defines being a warcaster? As far as I know, all that means is that you can telepathically command warjacks. It also seems to come hand in hand with arcane talent, but that's another question: anyone can be a wizard, right? Meaning that as long as he's smart enough, and has all the proper schooling, training and experience, Joe Farmer could be a wizard?

Assuming the above is true, then I don't give a damn about being a Warcaster. What's stopping me from playing a Wizard/Fighter hybrid that's as powerful as Stryker, but can't command warjacks? Can I use Warcaster armor? If not, why not? What is it that makes Warcasters special when it comes to that armor, why can't a normal wizard use it? And what about boosting attacks and damage? I've always thought it represented the Warcaster focusing on attacking his foe instead of focusing on powering up his armor or casting spells. Isn't that's why it's called focus instead of spell points?

I just feel like people are getting hung up on the whole Warcaster thing, because of the way the tabletop game is skewed. If focuses on powerful individuals who are warcasters fighting for their nation, but they're not necessarily powerful individuals because they're warcasters. We have at least two examples of characters in the fluff who weren't warcasters which would probably wreck any of them, Voyle and Vinter. Discounting Voyle (you can blame his absurd strength and agility on Menoth, if you want) we still have one character who is incredibly powerful and incredibly mortal. It seems to me that people ascribe too much to the warcaster label. Being a warcaster implies something about an individual, but doesn't necessarily mean they're living demi-gods, nor does it preclude a non-warcaster individual from being more powerful than them. It just so happens that a great many of the high level individuals in this setting are Warcasters (and to be fair, they're in a position where they'll be doing a LOT of fighting and are very very well protected sitting behind their armor and their whole army).

[Sthiel]

I'm not saying that by virtue of being a Warcaster a character should be more powerful than everyone else - I am saying that a Warcaster is very powerful and you shouldn't be able to be one until your character is more advanced. This doesn't in anyway mean that another type of character, just as advanced wouldn't be a match for them.

"Few in number, warcasters are the perfect combination of martial and magical prowess."

"They are titans among heroes, and it has been said, more than once, that the gods themselves would tremble before the towering might of a warcaster"

These are quotes from the RPG (which came first) - not the Miniature game. The power of a warcaster is constant through all the fluff and making them mundane would not be in keeping with the Iron Kingdoms world (imho)

[PG_ThatRickGuy]

Enumerate their powers:
1) Innate magical ability, similar to sorc, only lesser
2) Ability to control jacks, same as any marshal, only better
3) Ability to fight, on par with warriors give or take
4) Ability to boost steam armor/self performance

Take away a Warcaster's Jacks and Armor, and they ARE mundane. Depending on their focus, they are either a hobbled sorc and strong warrior, or a weak warrior and strong caster (toss in some other combinations of healer/rogue/etc... in there, but the general concept is the same).

If they don't have tons of gold to sink into building and/or maintaining jacks and power armor, they are going to be right on par with most average adventurers.

-Rick

[Psychomancer]

Well, I don't think there's any denial that warcasters are powerful characters. I think the crux of the concern is that once one person plays a warcaster, the rest of the party may as well sit back and buff their nails while the almighty focus-popping powerhouse resolves all conflicts effortlessly- much like Jedi PCs are wont to do in Star Wars games. Not only are they consummate combatants, they have access to a host of otherworldy powers that make them outstanding solo operatives. Gotta sneak past something? There's a spell for that. Convince someone that what you're saying is the truth? Spell. Lay waste to your foes? Spells, of course. Whereas a regular wizard or sorcerer can be waylaid by their anathema state of close combat with a skilled warrior, Warcasters can use their magic in the form of focus to close the gap quite readily.
However, I think there's a solution: Make warcasters astonishingly good at open warfare-scale combat...and nothing else. The level of dedication it takes to become a warcaster should be so intense that there is literally nothing else in the character's life. Diplomacy? Pah. Once a warcaster is called in, it's because diplomacy has failed. Building mechanika? That's what the Armory Corps is for*. Pathfinding? Nope. Healing? Not as such. Needlepoint? No way in hell.
Now, of course, the risk to this approach is that when the only tool one has is a hammer, all problems look like nails. But even without warcasters involved, how often do we hear stories of groups of player characters slaughtering entire nation-states rather than stoop so low as to pay for a night's lodging like ordinary folk? GMs need to be prepared to deal with these sort of high-powered shenanigans, regardless of the level or disposition of the players and their characters.
So, should a warcaster be balanced? I don't think it's strictly necessary that they are. But what they should not be is so well-rounded as to be a panacea to all the conflicts that an RPG can dish out.
And, as I have said before, a Jedi is a headache. A warcaster is an ambulatory catastrophe, and needs to be regarded as such.

*Yes, yes, I can hear you right now "But Nemo..." For starters, the dude's positively ancient in a profession where dying young is the norm. Second, you're not playing him.

[PG_The Captain]

Every warcaster starts from somewhere. Sorscha was a Winter guard officer before the sudden revelation that she had the power. She didn't immediately become a six-focus Kommander - it took several years for her to fully manifest not only the power, but the skill to master it.

I think there is room for budding warcasters in the setting. People who have the gift but not yet the skill to use it. It can even serve as a good plot device if the person in question doesn't want to be press-ganged into the national army. They may be dangerous to themselves and their surroundings if their powers are not tutored properly, which in itself can be a balancing factor against the sheer power waiting to be unleashed.

[Lanz]

A class can be balanced while still being prestigious. No doubt PP is aware that it would kill a lot of the fictional power behind warcasters if just any joe-nobody could start as one. That doesn't mean that they can't have the warcaster class be on the same power scale as the other classes.

Based on what we know of the new IKRPG it doesn't sound like there will be classes so much as skillsets players can focus on to orient around styles of play and combat. 'Warcaster' could just be another package of skills that you can't get until you meet certain requirements.

[The Happy Anarchist]

So, need to clear up a bit of confusion here. Warcasters are more than just people that can telepathically connect to warjacks for one. Even without any jacks whatsoever, a Warcaster is more formidable than your average fighter or mage. The actual Warcaster talent is very rare, and results in the ability to generate and apply focus to become much more capable in different ways, such as protecting yourself or fighting more proficiently or better spells. This isn't just from the WM rules, the actual fluff itself states this from before WM even existed.

That is not to say that you are going to be more powerful than someone, or that the most powerful beings are necessarily warcasters. Vinter is a good example of a pure mortal who is so formidable that he can combat Warcasters and Warlocks by himself and come out ahead. That said, an enormous majority of the more dangerous people in the setting are warcasters or warlocks. It definitely gives you a massive boost to power. One thing is that it does seem to end up spreading you out a bit. You are learning jack controlling, magic and combat as well as your own unique tricks and that does spread someone out compared to say, Vinter who focuses almost purely on combat and leadership.

Now, that said - you can make a system which allows for characters of different power levels, while still being balanced. It is very difficult but can be done. This is often done by niche protection, as Psychomancer suggested, and as the dichotomy between someone like Kraye or Caine compared to Scout General Rebald, Saxon Orrick or Gavyn Kyle for example.

Another way is by having "out of game" resources, such as FATE does with the Dresden RPG. Wizards are incredibly powerful players in that setting. They can do all sorts of incredibly dangerous things and bring the house down. Similarly with other magical beings such as Knights of the Fae court or Knights of the Cross. However, those who are less powerful, or even Pure Mortals both have less places they have to spread skills out in, and especially in the case of Pure Mortals, more Fate points. This allows them to get advantages in game that help them to feel like they are not being left out, and still allow them to contribute even without being extremely directly powerful. This works well in that setting because it fits the Dresden novels extremely well. Would it fit the IK as well? Not sure, but it is a possibility.

[Lanz]

As far as I'm aware, the power of a warcaster is not innately because they're warcasters. The IKRPG probably isn't the best example because PP can't control what sorts of characters will eventually become warcasters, so I'd say Warmachine is a far more accurate impression of what a warcaster is actually supposed to be like in the setting.

They have little in common with each other outside of their ability to allocate focus to warjacks and overboost their powerfield. Pretty much everything else can also be done by warlocks, and is a common feature among all warcasters too. The rest of their power generally derives from their past and their other training.

What makes a warcaster superior to just any old dude who happens to figure out how to control 'jacks is, in my opinion, military support. They have access to all the best gear, all the newest tech, all the best teachers. Their lifestyle revolves around warfare, but every possible expense is taken to protect them, so they also have the most raw combat experience. All that could be given to anyone, warcaster or no. The reason it's given to warcasters is because they are a valuable investment, and are very rare. Each warcaster that they can get in the military is worth investing specialized equipment and training to maximize them as much as possible.

In Warmachine, we see those 'maximized' warcasters. Outside of that, there are lesser levels of warcasters, like Cygnar's Journeyman, for example, and Choirs of Menoth. Neither of these are even close to the military leaders we use in Warmachine, but they still have the warcaster talent.

So, again, I don't see any reason why Warcasters need to be better than anyone else. Unless a military force picks them up and invests in them, there's not much reason for them to be that much more formidable than any other character. Being able to use focus and control a warjack will be plenty already.

[PPS_Simon]

As far as I'm aware, the power of a warcaster is not innately because they're warcasters. The IKRPG probably isn't the best example because PP can't control what sorts of characters will eventually become warcasters, so I'd say Warmachine is a far more accurate impression of what a warcaster is actually supposed to be like in the setting.

They have little in common with each other outside of their ability to allocate focus to warjacks and overboost their powerfield. Pretty much everything else can also be done by warlocks, and is a common feature among all warcasters too. The rest of their power generally derives from their past and their other training.

What makes a warcaster superior to just any old dude who happens to figure out how to control 'jacks is, in my opinion, military support. They have access to all the best gear, all the newest tech, all the best teachers. Their lifestyle revolves around warfare, but every possible expense is taken to protect them, so they also have the most raw combat experience. All that could be given to anyone, warcaster or no. The reason it's given to warcasters is because they are a valuable investment, and are very rare. Each warcaster that they can get in the military is worth investing specialized equipment and training to maximize them as much as possible.

In Warmachine, we see those 'maximized' warcasters. Outside of that, there are lesser levels of warcasters, like Cygnar's Journeyman, for example, and Choirs of Menoth. Neither of these are even close to the military leaders we use in Warmachine, but they still have the warcaster talent.

So, again, I don't see any reason why Warcasters need to be better than anyone else. Unless a military force picks them up and invests in them, there's not much reason for them to be that much more formidable than any other character. Being able to use focus and control a warjack will be plenty already.

Just a small note, but Choir acolytes do not possess the warcaster talent to any degree. Their hymns affect warjacks through the divine providence of Menoth in a more generalized sense.

[Lanz]

Just a small note, but Choir acolytes do not possess the warcaster talent to any degree. Their hymns affect warjacks through the divine providence of Menoth in a more generalized sense.

The Protectorate book says choirs are assembled from those most likely to demonstrate warcaster talent. I can't recall where, but I'm pretty sure I've read elsewhere, as well, that many protectorate casters were on the choir at some point.

Anyways, point is that they start off somewhere. There is such thing as a 'warcaster' that is still very new to the idea and isn't going to be nearly as powerful as the warcasters we play as in Warmachine.

[PPS_Simon]

The Protectorate book says choirs are assembled from those most likely to demonstrate warcaster talent. I can't recall where, but I'm pretty sure I've read elsewhere, as well, that many protectorate casters were on the choir at some point.

Anyways, point is that they start off somewhere. There is such thing as a 'warcaster' that is still very new to the idea and isn't going to be nearly as powerful as the warcasters we play as in Warmachine.

It's a great screening method for the discovery of individuals with the warcaster talent since it places potentials in close contact with warjacks while in a combat situation, but the powers they are using are not a manifestation of the warcaster talent itself.

Your thesis is spot on, though! A beginning warcaster in the new IKRPG is not going to be on par with Caine, but will have a lot more in common with a Journeyman.

[Lanz]

It's a great screening method for the discovery of individuals with the warcaster talent since it places potentials in close contact with warjacks while in a combat situation, but the powers they are using are not a manifestation of the warcaster talent itself.

Oh, yeah, I know that. Protectorate would have a -lot- of warcasters if every single choirboy had the talent. But some of the choir do end up being warcasters. I wish I could find that little sentence that directly linked the Warcasters to having been on the choir. I seem to recall something that made it sound a lot more definite, like being part of the choir was part of their early warcaster training.

[PPS_Simon]

Oh, yeah, I know that. Protectorate would have a -lot- of warcasters if every single choirboy had the talent. But some of the choir do end up being warcasters. I wish I could find that little sentence that directly linked the Warcasters to having been on the choir. I seem to recall something that made it sound a lot more definite, like being part of the choir was part of their early warcaster training.

You're referring to the line, "These valiant faithful are chosen from among those deemed most likely to demonstrate the rare gift of connecting to and controlling warjacks in battle." Most recently published in Forces of WARMACHINE: Protectorate of Menoth, pg. 88.

I just wanted to clarify that the choir hymns described in the model entry are not a manifestation of the warcaster talent. Some warcasters are certainly found among the ranks of the choir, but any that are found to exhibit that talent are removed from the choir for special training immediately.

[The Happy Anarchist]

The Protectorate book says choirs are assembled from those most likely to demonstrate warcaster talent. I can't recall where, but I'm pretty sure I've read elsewhere, as well, that many protectorate casters were on the choir at some point.

Anyways, point is that they start off somewhere. There is such thing as a 'warcaster' that is still very new to the idea and isn't going to be nearly as powerful as the warcasters we play as in Warmachine.

Correct, but even a Journeyman is an extremely powerful model. The bare bones, just out of training, using hand me down equipment Journeyman is already an extremely capable fighter. Capable of hitting Def 14 at ranged a majority of the time, and 15 in melee. Able to do severe damage because of the ability to boost damage. Capable of attacking 4 times in a round. Being able to be ARM 19 with 5 boxes.

Compare the Journeyman warcaster to other solos in WM, such as the aforementioned Manhunters, Paladins, and the like. The Journeyman can potentially kill them, often before they get to combat. Even in combat it is Def 14 Arm 14 with 5 boxes. This is advanced warrior level.

That is, as said using the argument from a within WM perspective.

My argument however, is from a fluff perspective. In the fluff, being a warcaster (and warlocks are similar) is actually something different, unique and empowering - above and beyond the ability to control warnouns. It gives access to a tremendous power source that others do not have access to, and considering that this is something that has been reflected in the fluff and rules of both WM and the IK, it is not something I expect to see gone.

If that is the case, the balance would need to be achieved in one of the number of other ways, other than just making Warcasters/Warlocks equal in outright power to everything else.

[Lanz]

It's true that the Journeyman is probably a very powerful character. I mean the average 2 point character solo is the equal of something like a level 15 in the IKRPG? Or at least that's what I think characters like Taryn and Alexia were? (I have no idea, actually, I just seem to recall the level being somewhere in that range). If a 2 point solo reflects the battlefield capabilities of a medium level 3.5 character (which is fair given how chaotic and dangerous a battlefield is compared to small skirmishes in dungeons), then a 3 point solo is probably rather high level already.

Most of their power, as in the examples you provided, are coming purely from the Focus, though. Outside of that, the Journeyman has neither impressive stats nor impressive rules. Strip all that away and you have what's basically Rutger Shaw with no special rules. Likewise you could take most solos and tack on a 3-focus journeyman toolkit and suddenly they become very interesting and powerful pieces.

So my point is that you could take an already-developed class and give them warcaster mechanics, just in the area of having focus and controlling a warjack, and that's already going to create a strong parallel to what we'd expect from a warcaster in Warmachine (on the journeyman level, anyways).

I agree with the fluff perspective, but, again, obviously the lowly journeyman isn't packing that sort of power either. Is it unreasonable to think that the new IKRPG might reflect the various 'levels' of a warcaster where the player can be that journeyman who is powerful, but not -that- powerful, with room to progress further? I didn't play the IKRPG, but I'd have a hard time swallowing the idea of someone picking up the Warcaster prestige class then suddenly exploding with new power that they didn't have before. The fluff seems to suggest that there's more time involved in that growth, yet the recognized 'warcaster' is still a warcaster, novice as he/she is.

[The Happy Anarchist]

Well, it is just that. Discovering that you are a warcaster does give an "explosion of power" - that means different things at different levels, but it is exactly my point that a Journeyman Warcaster without the "warcastery bits" is actually a fairly mediocre combatant. Even if you just grant the spells, it has basically Arcane Bolt at Magic Ability 3. It is precisely the ability to access Focus that allows it to fight above its weight class.

Also, 2 point solos generally fall into the Level 8-17 range. Yes, that is a huge range. Saxon Orrick and Pendrake for example are extremely talented and skilled individuals that are very high level, just that a lot of their skills don't apply on the tabletop. The points to level thing doesn't work out except in the most general terms.

I am not saying Warcaster should = instantly fighting off whole squads and being able to solo armies. That said, being a warcaster is definitely giving you access to a power source that puts you above and beyond your peers - that is how the fluff goes. It is more than just being a capable combatant. Access to the Focus or Fury mechanic is giving you a whole different level of power that others don't have access to. You can have someone be a more capable fighter, or a more powerful wizard - but being a warcaster or warlock is more than that in the setting and I think that is something that can be reflected in the rules without just making them an alternate class and without being unbalanced, as long as other concerns are affected.

[PG_ThatRickGuy]

Capable of hitting Def 14 at ranged a majority of the time, and 15 in melee. Able to do severe damage because of the ability to boost damage. Capable of attacking 4 times in a round. Being able to be ARM 19 with 5 boxes.

I could be wrong on this, but my understanding is that a warcaster's ability to boost attack and damage rolls in the game is based on their ability to use their focus power to amplify their power armor.

No power armor, nada for boosts. Junky hand-me-down power armor? Go ahead and boost, but you better have a mechanic handy to keep that suit opperating.

Not only are the casters from WM the top of the top, but they are fully funded, meaning they have the best quality gear, the top mechanics guilds and workers to keep their gear at that level, and enough money to replace any damaged or worn part.

Take out the backing the recieve at the federal level, and their performance will quickly drop back in line with an average adventurer.

-Rick

[The Happy Anarchist]

Boosting power field is from the armor - you have to have warcaster armor to do that. However, I don't think boosting attack and damage rolls does. It has been a while since I read the d20 rules for that one, but I don't believe warcaster armor is required for that.

In any case, even if it did - what about warlocks? They are the flip side of the coin, and don't seem to require any special equipment.

[Psychomancer]

Just thought I'd also toss in that people like Vinter and Garrick Voyle have limited Plot-Immortality. That is, as long a the Plot does not dictate otherwise, they are invincible.

[Lanz]

In any case, even if it did - what about warlocks? They are the flip side of the coin, and don't seem to require any special equipment.

Other than warbeasts, you mean?

It's going to be interesting to see how Warlocks are handled in IKRPG. On the one hand they could just rely on their own health to cast spells, or they may augment it with a single beast, or some smaller ones.

I can't imagine an IKRPG character being much better than a Lesser Warlock either way.

[Psychomancer]

I could be wrong on this, but my understanding is that a warcaster's ability to boost attack and damage rolls in the game is based on their ability to use their focus power to amplify their power armor.

No power armor, nada for boosts. Junky hand-me-down power armor? Go ahead and boost, but you better have a mechanic handy to keep that suit opperating.
-Rick

From the way some of the equipment (notably warcaster armor) is described in the IKCG, this might have been the original intent- using attribute boosts and other armor-based powers would require expenditure of Focus to activate. Indeed, in the early days, some people interpreted the set-up as focus being produced by the arcane turbine in warcaster armor.
However, the rules as written make no distinction as to whether a warcaster must be armored to use focus or not. It is my opinion that having Warcaster armor rely more heavily on Focus-based gadgets and abilities would be more in keeping with the setting, and having Warcasters be fairly nerfed while not wearing their best kit would suit me just fine. But the fact remains that it is not written in the rules that warcasters must wear their armor to use focus.

Just putting that out there for clarity.

I'm sure Happy Anarchist remembers Redcap's warcaster from the last IKRPG game he played with us. The guy was a dynamo who popped focus like candy and never spared so much as a thought to commanding his 'jacks. While I could not dispute the effectiveness of this playstyle, it kind of irked me a bit that I went to all the trouble of statting up Cygnaran mil-spec warjacks and generally saw them relegated to holding the flanks because the warcaster was just so much more efficient at dealing with the types of enemies 'jacks are generally called upon to deal with.

[SteakAndSpirits]

I've always preferred game systems where, as a general rule, all player classes are balanced against one another. In the context of this discussion, that would include Warcasters. The balance doesn't need to be symmetrical, far from it.

But no, I can't see any advantages to not balancing all classes to be asymmetrically equivalent on the power curve.

-s&s

[PG_Zeber]

From the way some of the equipment (notably warcaster armor) is described in the IKCG, this might have been the original intent- using attribute boosts and other armor-based powers would require expenditure of Focus to activate. Indeed, in the early days, some people interpreted the set-up as focus being produced by the arcane turbine in warcaster armor.
However, the rules as written make no distinction as to whether a warcaster must be armored to use focus or not. It is my opinion that having Warcaster armor rely more heavily on Focus-based gadgets and abilities would be more in keeping with the setting, and having Warcasters be fairly nerfed while not wearing their best kit would suit me just fine. But the fact remains that it is not written in the rules that warcasters must wear their armor to use focus.

Just putting that out there for clarity.

No, Warcasters dont need Warcaster Armour to do all the things that make them Warcasters. Just look at Amon and (I think) Vlad. One is half naked, one wears ancient armor. It is true that some 'Casters rely more heavily on their armor (Nemo for example) but I don't think it limits them the use of their innate abilities.

Or maybe I'm wrong and Amon and Vlad are really powerful characters with special kills at high levels that they simply are awesome

Also a possibility that they rely more on the armor at low level (junk as it is).

[Lanz]

Or maybe I'm wrong and Amon and Vlad are really powerful characters with special kills at high levels that they simply are awesome

Harbinger is in that list as well, and Doug has mentioned that it's basically that they use unique powers (Amon's Monastic training, Harbinger's divine power, and I think for vlad it's blood magic or powerful enchantments or something), but they don't differ enough from normal Focus to have their own unique mechanics. So they just use focus like other warcasters, but they aren't like normal warcasters.

[The Happy Anarchist]

As I understand it, they do use Focus. What they don't use is a Power Field - but for the purposes of the game they have one, because a warcaster without one is dead.

As for warlocks - beasts are certainly a better option than leaching from your health, but a naked warlock can "cut" for fury and generate boosts and additional attacks.

@Psychomancer - Yeah, definitely hope that jacks play a bigger role in the game. I would be concerned about making casters rely super heavily on equipment. We tried that to a bit with Gun Mages, and waiting for that first magelock is rough for people.

The question is how does controlling an extremely potent and dangerous extra combatant, while being a formidable combatant yourself get balanced in any way other than indirectly, through lack of focus or outside points or what have you.

[Lanz]

As I understand it, they do use Focus. What they don't use is a Power Field - but for the purposes of the game they have one, because a warcaster without one is dead.

As for warlocks - beasts are certainly a better option than leaching from your health, but a naked warlock can "cut" for fury and generate boosts and additional attacks.

Which I think is actually realistic for the RPG, if that's what it comes to. Afterall, you have healing spells and restorative items in an RPG that a warlock lacks (which raises a point; why aren't all warlocks and warcasters carrying like 10 healing potions and accompanied by a potion porter with backpacks of them? Pfft. Balance.).

So given that a spellcaster probably doesn't need to be casting spells all the time, it's probably not unrealistic if warlocks can cut themselves for fury and actually depend on it as their main source of fury, then when they get a warbeast (probably as hard to get as a warjack) they get its fury to help them out.

[Whimper]

(which raises a point; why aren't all warlocks and warcasters carrying like 10 healing potions and accompanied by a potion porter with backpacks of them? Pfft. Balance.).

The answer to that is clear- the wargame better represents the IK setting than the RPG did. There are no easily accessible magic healing potions, even if your warnoun did want to walk around carrying ten of them. Instead, there are iffy alchemical solutions that are better than nothing, but not so good that you don't worry about getting stabbed in the face.

In the first RPG, they tried to represent this with market cost. True healing- expensive. Alchemicals- somewhat less expensive. In the new RPG, I woudn't be surprised if true healing potions were rare or non-existent altogether.

[Defenstrator]

I hope so. Healing potions tend to rob games of their feeling of risk. Nobody gets too scared until the potions run out.

Focus definately gives a power boost of some kind. Warcasters can directly use their magical power to hit more accurately, harder, and more often in combat. They. An also boost the attack and hitting of their spells, which regular magic users cannot. It's this that seems to give them the edge over regular magic users and turns many of them into deadly warriors.

It just seems kind of strange that individuals that nations seek out to draft into the military are just like everyone else when it comes to power level. If that were true you'd see them building armies around high level fighters or wizards.

[AshenFang]

It's true that the Journeyman is probably a very powerful character. I mean the average 2 point character solo is the equal of something like a level 15 in the IKRPG?

PC's should be a cut above the average joe, if even at level 1 a PC isn't any more special than Bob the farmer or Tim the local drunk.. ...who needs him. PC's are the heroes of the adventure, and while no, they are not starting off as Nemo, I don't think starting them off at Journeyman level to be too must of a leap. A small selection of spells, a bit of an ability to augment their combat or defenses.. ..and the ability to effect jacks. Keep in mine that last part.. ..doesn't say they get jacks, I imagine most of the Journeymen out there don't have their own personal jacks, but those issued to them by the Cygnarian army for the task at hand.. ..as a PC, like many things, Jacks would come with time. Should they be balanced? ...of course, what kind of question is that, making a game with one class purposely unbalanced would be just silly, heh.. either you'd have a group of all the unbalanced character type, seeing little to no play of the other archtypes, or you'd have the one player being the hero, and the rest just feeling like henchmen, and no one wants that. There's nothing at all wrong with a player character feeling powerful from the get go, just have to challenge them equally.

[The Happy Anarchist]

Ah. Arguably Tim the local drunk and Bob the farmer are actually much worse than a standard level 1 character with those little non-class NPC classes D&D has. Which leads to the other problem - rabid cats clearing out towns of low level farmers and drunks. Or the occasional unlucky first level wizard that happened to use his magic missile already.

I do prefer my starting characters a cut above D&Ds starting characters though.

[allistorpreist]

Remember that Vinter guy, totally no match for Sorcha. And that Voyle character? Stryker totally pwnd him.

Warcasters are amazing characters and very, very powerful. They are a cut above and it should be reflected in the game, but not so much that you end up with the old Star Wars jedi problem. That is to say, the jedi plays the game and everyone else drives the ship and fixes his stuff. It is not fun at all. Hell, even in the prequal movies part of the problem was that the only credible threat to the jedi were other jedi. I don't want that in my game. And it is seldom fun for a GM to try to make threats that can take out the jedi/warcaster/wizard, but are still fun for the bodger/rogue/gun mage.

PP mentioned multiple start levels at one point, so I suspect there is a starting powerlevel below where a warcaster can be played, but once you get to their powerlevel you should be at their power level. There is pleanty of room in the Iron Kingdoms for epic, not warcasters. Even looking at the game there are a ton of characters who can put some serious fear into a warcaster and that is in a game build around warcasters.

Balance does not have to be perfect in an RPG, but there needs to be enough balance that all the players participate. So yes, Warcasters (and warlocks) should be balanced. And if PP don't balance them, she will.

[The Happy Anarchist]

Yeah. We remember that Vinter guy. You know. The one we kept referring to in the thread as examples of characters that exceeded the power of warcasters in specific areas.

Just not really sure what your post pointed out other than the thing we already stated.