Re: (TFT) How would you modify HaOW? (Heroes and other worlds)

[Joel BoardgameRpger <joel.siragher@gmail.com>]

I haven't yet purchased Heroes & Other Worlds, but I've been really
intrigued ever since I first noticed on this list a few days ago. Since
that time I've dug up as many reviews and play reports as I could find. So
my first disclaimer is my comments are based on second-party sources, I
haven't actually read the rules.

>>The second thing I should mention is that my favorite version of the TFT
rules is Basic Melee + Advanced Wizard + Legends of the Ancient World
skills and experience.

Interesting.  Ill have to take another look at Legends of ancient
world(LAW) again

>>And I don't like Into the Labyrinth's talent system. I think it's a
really interesting idea that was poorly executed.

Just curious: An example of something hard to swollow in the TFT skill
talent system.

>>I also don't like the ITL experience system.
what do you do for experience now( that is, that part of the LAW system
keywords/phases rewards?)?

>>he appears to be producing a regular magazine to support the game. This
all gets a big thumbs up for me.

I get the mag. a bit pricey for print version but that cant be helped.

>>The second thing that intrigues me is that, based on the list of spells
he released for his spell supplement, it appears he's making a genuine
attempt at making Heroes & Other Worlds compatible with D&D.

I have it but need to read it.

>>So, at bare minimum, I'll probably pick up the Robert S. Conley
conversion and the spell list for use in my Melee/LAW combo games.

good idea

>>1) Endurance. I think this is a great bonus to give player characters.
Without healing magic, TFT is a little too lethal for long-term RPG play. I
also think separating Endurance from Strength for Wizards is great from a
flavor standpoint.
I
t seems to help quite a bit.


>2) Square grid support. In my opinion TFT really shines as a skirmish
game, more so than an RPG. The mechanics are perfect for a Warhammer Quest
or Mordheim style game. But I want to use it with cool dungeon tiles,

I still like hex movement better, because it gives you 'True' movement, and
you aren't overwhelmed by people behind you.  I say, back to the wall,
gives you less chance of getting overwhelmed. I still use hex maps. those
interlocking plastic hex tile games are out of print but still great.


>>3) LAW-style skill system. Again, I don't know if this is really true,
but that's the sense I get from what I've read. I really like LAW's skills
so that's a big plus from me.

>>Things I'm suspicious or leery of:

>>1) No characteristic improvement with experience. One of the things I
love with Melee/Wizard is that, thanks to the bell curve of 3D6, there is a
default hierarchy among warriors. Unarmored militia can be effective at 32
points. Leather-wearing light infantry can be effective at 34 points.
Chain-wearing Huscarls/Household retainers/oathsworn types can be effective
at 36 points. Chain-wearing mounted Knights can be effective at 38 points.
Plate-wearing heavy Knights can only effective at 40 points or higher (that
all assumes typical historical gear, i.e., not a plate wearing knight armed
only with a dagger). So you have a natural funnel effect where most
combatants will be militia and only the rarest combatants will be the heavy
knights. Without increasing stats, how can you possibly achieve heavy
knight status? That plate mail is too big a drain on DX, and the mounted
combat drains it even further. I suppose you could do it with Weapon
skills, which one
 could say is far more realistic than having an 18 DX reduced to 12 from
Armor, Shield, and Horsemanship. But I'm suspicious as to how well this
works.

This is really a question for fenwick/brandon. I feel the same way. I have
issues with the HTH/unarmed combat system.
He has an unarmed combat skill which increase the to hit, and to damage of
an unarmed combat roll by one per skill lvl.
So what you have here is a static damage case which is 1pt / 6 STR, plus 1
damage per lvl. I can see this topping off at 5 static damage points per
attack. Its more than average 1d6, and less than 2d6. But, being realistic
unless you are an advanced martial artist, then you shouldnt be doing 2
killing dice per strike. But whats to say you wouldnt do more damage say
with UnArmed combat and tiger claws. This might make a good article: how to
make a martial artist.  Special weapons are not in the rules, except for
net and boomerang, maybe some others. but he doesnt have any thing special
about those weapons written out. He has told me in an email that perhaps he
made the rules a bit too brief. I think he needs to come up with a deluxe
edition :)

I already emailed fenwick/brandon about the berserk rule. He seems to agree
that particular rule seems a bit weak.


>>2) Poorly conceived ST requirements for weapons. I read somewhere that
there was a much more even distribution of ST or "heft" requirements for
weapons. I think your post mentions that there's nothing over 12. In my
opinion, this undermines one of the coolest aspects behind the Endurance
idea. I like that you have to choose between ST and END. END seems to be a
superior defensive stat, since it regenerates more quickly. But you still
need ST to gain access to those good weapons. If you don't really need ST
to gain access to weapons, well then it seems like a no-brainer. Just put
all your points in END.

Im in complete agreement with you here. However, Brandon says what controls
access to weapons is Money.
Your money as an adventurer starts at 3d6x10. Average is 110.   That means
the average fighter can start with a shortsword 2d6-1, and then there is a
rule on page 36 which states you get +1 dam per 2 str points over the
weapon ST min, giving you 2d6+1.  Unless you start out with 180, which
givfes you the broadsword and 2d6+3 for 150 bucks.

How long does it take to earn 200 coin? 1 game? hum. Whats the difference
then?  Unless you are in a dirt poor world, in which case you should be
fighting with sharp sticks (spears). You have your 1d6+2 ST:8  which maxes
out a 2d6+4 on a charge, for  a mere 20 coin.

There is a nice alternate Arms and Armor article in Cauldron 1, which may
fix the problem.

>>3) IQ used to cast spells. LAW does this too and I really don't like it.
Admittedly in TFT casters are weak because they have to spread out their
points too much. But END should solve this problem. In LAW, the problem is
that casters can be too specialized. Just pump up your IQ and you can be a
super caster. I like using DX for casting.

I need to dwell on this a bit. I have rolled up a caster yet.

>> 4) I read somewhere that the tactical parts of the game have been
simplified or stripped out, LAW style. In particular, facing, pole weapon
special attacks, and engagement are extremely important to me. I think it
was the comparison chart between the various versions of TFT I saw
somewhere that suggested these aspects of Melee were not used in Heroes &
Other Worlds, but I could be wrong.

There are some aspects that are gone but its a new game.

Anyway, I'd love to hear your response to the above and whether you think
my pre-conceived notions are completely invalid or unwarranted. Thanks!




On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Sgt Hulka <hulkasgt@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I haven't yet purchased Heroes & Other Worlds, but I've been really
> intrigued ever since I first noticed on this list a few days ago. Since
> that time I've dug up as many reviews and play reports as I could find. So
> my first disclaimer is my comments are based on second-party sources, I
> haven't actually read the rules.
>
> The second thing I should mention is that my favorite version of the TFT
> rules is Basic Melee + Advanced Wizard + Legends of the Ancient World
> skills and experience. There are a few too many things about Advanced Melee
> that force mini/maxing down a particular path, in my opinion. And I don't
> like Into the Labyrinth's talent system. I think it's a really interesting
> idea that was poorly executed. I also don't like the ITL experience system.
> The whole "killing blow" thing is used in a lot of games, and I've always
> thought it was a broken mechanic. Fortunately, I LOVE the LAW skill system.
> I think the individual skills are really simple and intuitive. But I also
> love the tactical game play of Melee and Advanced Melee, which I feel is
> lacking in LAW. That's why I've found my sweet spot in combining
> Melee/Wizard combat with LAW skills.
>
> So there are two things that intrigue me about Heroes & Other Worlds. The
> first is that the author seems like a super-producing maniac. He's already
> converted a Robert S. Conley hexcrawl (and I LOVE Robert S. Conley's work).
> He's in the process of converting a Saxon setting (and I LOVE the Bernard
> Cornwell Saxon series so I'm really intrigued by this), he's produced a
> sandlot style adventure, and he appears to be producing a regular magazine
> to support the game. This all gets a big thumbs up for me.
>
> The second thing that intrigues me is that, based on the list of spells he
> released for his spell supplement, it appears he's making a genuine attempt
> at making Heroes & Other Worlds compatible with D&D. I don't love the TFT
> magic system. Believe it or not, I prefer D&D. For whatever reason D&D has
> always felt more evocative (no pun intended) to me, and I've always felt it
> encourages creative use of spells. I know that's probably unique to me,
> since most people hate the Vancian spell system. In TFT, magic just doesn't
> feel THAT different from mundane archery or melee combat to me.
>
> So, at bare minimum, I'll probably pick up the Robert S. Conley conversion
> and the spell list for use in my Melee/LAW combo games.
>
> The verdict's still out on whether I pick up the actual game rules,
> however. From what I've read, here are the things that appeal to me:
>
> 1) Endurance. I think this is a great bonus to give player characters.
> Without healing magic, TFT is a little too lethal for long-term RPG play. I
> also think separating Endurance from Strength for Wizards is great from a
> flavor standpoint.
>
> 2) Square grid support. In my opinion TFT really shines as a skirmish
> game, more so than an RPG. The mechanics are perfect for a Warhammer Quest
> or Mordheim style game. But I want to use it with cool dungeon tiles, which
> are grid rather than hex based. Also, old D&D modules are all grid based.
> I've tried to convert TFT to a grid and failed. The trouble is you end up
> with two extra rear hexes or two extra side hexes, which makes getting
> outnumbered even more deadly than it already is, and makes taking down big
> monsters like dragons and giants even easier than it already is. I'm not
> sure how the Heroes & Other Worlds rules implement square grid support. If
> it's simply to add two rear or side hexes, well then I'll be disappointed.
>
> 3) LAW-style skill system. Again, I don't know if this is really true, but
> that's the sense I get from what I've read. I really like LAW's skills so
> that's a big plus from me.
>
> Things I'm suspicious or leery of:
>
> 1) No characteristic improvement with experience. One of the things I love
> with Melee/Wizard is that, thanks to the bell curve of 3D6, there is a
> default hierarchy among warriors. Unarmored militia can be effective at 32
> points. Leather-wearing light infantry can be effective at 34 points.
> Chain-wearing Huscarls/Household retainers/oathsworn types can be effective
> at 36 points. Chain-wearing mounted Knights can be effective at 38 points.
> Plate-wearing heavy Knights can only effective at 40 points or higher (that
> all assumes typical historical gear, i.e., not a plate wearing knight armed
> only with a dagger). So you have a natural funnel effect where most
> combatants will be militia and only the rarest combatants will be the heavy
> knights. Without increasing stats, how can you possibly achieve heavy
> knight status? That plate mail is too big a drain on DX, and the mounted
> combat drains it even further. I suppose you could do it with Weapon
> skills, which one
>  could say is far more realistic than having an 18 DX reduced to 12 from
> Armor, Shield, and Horsemanship. But I'm suspicious as to how well this
> works.
>
> 2) Poorly conceived ST requirements for weapons. I read somewhere that
> there was a much more even distribution of ST or "heft" requirements for
> weapons. I think your post mentions that there's nothing over 12. In my
> opinion, this undermines one of the coolest aspects behind the Endurance
> idea. I like that you have to choose between ST and END. END seems to be a
> superior defensive stat, since it regenerates more quickly. But you still
> need ST to gain access to those good weapons. If you don't really need ST
> to gain access to weapons, well then it seems like a no-brainer. Just put
> all your points in END.
>
> 3) IQ used to cast spells. LAW does this too and I really don't like it.
> Admittedly in TFT casters are weak because they have to spread out their
> points too much. But END should solve this problem. In LAW, the problem is
> that casters can be too specialized. Just pump up your IQ and you can be a
> super caster. I like using DX for casting.
>
> 4) I read somewhere that the tactical parts of the game have been
> simplified or stripped out, LAW style. In particular, facing, pole weapon
> special attacks, and engagement are extremely important to me. I think it
> was the comparison chart between the various versions of TFT I saw
> somewhere that suggested these aspects of Melee were not used in Heroes &
> Other Worlds, but I could be wrong.
>
> Anyway, I'd love to hear your response to the above and whether you think
> my pre-conceived notions are completely invalid or unwarranted. Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Fri, 8/2/13, Joel BoardgameRpger <joel.siragher@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Subject: (TFT) How would you modify HaOW? (Heroes and other worlds)
>  To: tft@brainiac.com, "John Linzy" <jslinzy@gmail.com>
>  Date: Friday, August 2, 2013, 7:11 AM
>
>  How would you modify HaOW? Heroes and
>  other worlds?
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"