Sell me on Iron Kingdoms

>>50657760
Pros- Combat is fun if you like tabletop wargames. Can be a good introductory way to get people into a wargame. Excellent setting building and a well-established background to pick and choose from.

Cons- Excellent setting building and a well-established background to pick and choose from, which can be excellent resources, are also intimidating since your players can easily access most of this information just as easily as you, which can be problematic if you aren't in the habit of knowing literally everything 100% of the time.
Also the battlefields can be a bitch to set up and seem lackluster with no terrain, grids can make things better or worse since it uses wargame rules.


Those are off the top of my head, but all in all it's quite fun. Easy to break if your players are good at wargames, though.

>>50657760

I spent how much money on this book only for the PCs to balk and start making fun of it for being based on a wargame and refusing to take it seriously? Fuck im still pissed two years later

the system is really fun, but yes the backstory is pretty extensive and the system is very much tied to the setting. That said the setting is kind of fun. I'd recommend trying it out for a short campaign if you get the time.

>>50657794
To be fair, if you're dedicated you can mine the old 3.5 books for plot ideas that most players are unlikely to know about, unless they're super dedicated. Even 90% of the actual WHM players are unaware of most of that fluff.

Anyone have any examples of people going full-on epic or mega-fail in this game?

It's a decent game, though it does suffer some serious issues due to it being the first attempt at working with the system outside of a wargame.

The skill system is kinda messed up and the math for it doesn't work (A minimum stats human rolls more to resist interrogation than a maxed out heroic tier interrogator when failing to beat them means they get to feed you false info for instance)

You'll also find that there is a very heavy focus on 'I want to play X from the wargame'. I like the game but I do wish it would do a bit more to step out of the shadow of it's wargame basis.

>>50657846
true. The only REAL requirement is that this is one of the few systems that a GM MUST have working knowledge of the setting and the rules and how to work it in. Also, side not from personal experience, DONT try using star power- IE introducing characters from the tabletop. the rules don't like to translate well.

>>50657828
>PCs to balk and start making fun of it for being based on a wargame and refusing to take it seriously
why? what's so bad about being based on a wargame?