I did a couple screenshots of the movie and am trying to make out what's on there:

LEFT FRONT:

Characteristics: STr, T, Ag, Int, Will, Fel

Next to that, basic skills column2 associated char then 3 boxes and I can't see what that is

Under: fortune

RIGHT FRONT

Character Name, Race, Current Career, Current SOMETHING

To the right of that is a red box that I can't read WHYLEP THENONMLEB???

Specialization??.....Special abiliteis

Equipment

Weapons something something something special qualiteis

Armor damage Rsomething special qualities

ADVANCED SKILLS

Skill C-somethig Type boxes

..

Character sheet is very clear at 2:56

The red box in the upper right is: "Wound Threshhold"

You can see the skills. 3 Boxes to the right I think say "Trained"

Athletics: ST

Ballistic Skill: AG

Concentration AG

Intimidate ST

Resilicne To

Ride or run? AG

S...??? AG

Stealth AG

Weapon Skill St

Charm Fel

Disclpline WP

First Aid Int

Folklore Int

Gu...?? Fel

Intuition? Int

Leadership Fel

Nature Lore

Observation Int

Weapon box is listed listed as:

Weapon Damage Critical Range Special qualites

Armour Defence Soak Special Quality

The last two skills I could barely make out:

Skullduggery

Guile

jh

I see the skills as:

Athletics
Ballistic Skill
Coordination
Intimidate
Resilience
Ride

[That's not a word! Spelunking? Spelunkery? Something to do with Scale-sheer-surface? But that's probably covered by Athletics. Pfff. It's a long S word, but what? It's a physical skill so wouldn't be Skullduggery -- unless they mean it literally!]

Stealth
Weapon Skill

Charm
Discipline
First Aid
Folklore
Guile
Intuition
Leadership
Nature Lore
Observation

The most interesting thing about the character sheet is what's not on there -- height, weight, hair, eyes, handedness, distinguishing marks. However, these might be on cards -- just pull. Instant character. No different than rolling it randomly, which you would've done anyway. However, it might be fun to play for a while and invent your character's features as you go along. But there's something about it that makes me think the PCs as almost being totemic -- you're the Troll Slayer. Like there wouldn't be two the Troll Slayers in a party.

Well, I wrote up what I thought I could see and put it on my gallery page if anyone's interested:

http://gallery.rptools.net/v/contrib/emirikol7/?g2_page=2

Skullduggery would be a cool skill

jh

Hopefully the release version will include the minutae that we've all come to enjoy about WFRP 2e (handedness, distinguishing marks, etc). I mean it's not that hard to add it in separately, and all the old copious tables floating around will still be relevant (Excessively Hairy is edition independant after all). But them leaving it out just seems a tad careless with the family heirlooms if you take my meaning.

DagobahDave said:

Are the skills dependent on a specific stat? As in D&D do you draw your WS from your Strength value? Although I like the concept of derived stats, I found it virtually impossible to derive a dwarf's WS because of their physical contradictions. WS would be a combination of Strength (controlling the weapon), Agilit y (dexterity with the weapon), and Intelligence (learning techniques etc). But dwarfs have average S and Int and low Ag. Which means it was impossible to produce the high starting WS you get for them in the WFRP2nd ed game.

So I remained content with the idea of WS and BS being derrived skills within a core set of skills. But derrived in the sense that T is derrived from your physical stamina and muscle density.

The thing about the trollslayer is simply another reason I think that starting characters, specifically from the same career, will have the same stats. And that is bad and unrealistic. A scribe that turns trollslayer will not start off the same as a soldier that turns trollslayer. At least in WFRP2 you could look at the stats and see that the slayer had high starting Int and low starting S making him a scribe in his previous life.

Hellebore

Yeah, skills are associated with a characteristic. WS is based on Strength, BS on Agility.

Hellebore, what makes you think they'll all have the same stats? They could just give you 15 points to spread around, and use the career card's suggestions for primary characteristics. It's also possible that you just start off with some predetermined number in each of them. Maybe you roll for it -- roll ten dice, count the hammers. I haven't seen anything to tell us one way or another.

I'd expect if the stats are always the same that they'd be printed on the career card. But maybe they're set by race.

He mentions in part V (I think) that one character has a WS of 5 (I presume "5 dice"). Perhaps some GM's will want to use a decimal..in 2E the difference in strength was the same whether you had a 40 or a 49 when it came to bonus. I presume they just went to the straight integer.

jh

DagobahDave said:

The height, weight, etc. are no biggies to me. However I share your feelings about the uniqueness of each career in the party. That's been a nagging concern in my head since I heard about the career cards. I've had none of the boardgame impressions from the other stuff that most folks have been citing, but this notion of "totemic" characters you mentioned strikes me as the most boardgamish thing so far. Once someone draws the Top Hat that's it, no more Top Hats.

DagobahDave said:

Simply through the lack of variety you get with making it a dice pool system. Unless they are willing to have Strength 40 (dice that is) you can be pretty sure that there will be very little difference between stats and thus characters in the same career will have pretty much identical stats. When the stats are compressed down to so few numbers, each becomes far more important. Thus players will preferentially create optimised characters.

It's set up in a similar manner to D&D and until we can see how the game is structured I won't be able to tell if it will PUNISH you like D&D does. Punish you for NOT optimising your character.

In WFRP2 Strength was more than the SB. A S39 character may have only had a SB of 3, but they had a pretty good chance of beating a S40 character in a wrestle, or pick up the same amount of stuff etc.

I don't like games that cannot represent differences between characters physically and mentally. I don't like the D&D system of attributes because they are so limiting. In this everyone will be the same or very similar strengths. They will increase at the same rate, they will be identical in characteristics. It is virtually impossible for two people to be identical in strength or agility. WFRP2 could represent that, WFRP3 cannot.

This is what i said at Strike To Stun:

Two paladins played to optimum efficiency along the same routes will also have identical abilities. They will look like mirror images of one another.

Two ratcatchers will start with random starting skills/talents, a wide spread of stat values and will at the end of the career have a list of the same skills and talents. One might have a low toughness (always sick from the sewers) and another low fellowship (sewer gas permeates his pores).

D&D not only does not reward characters played with anything other than optimised characters, it pretty much punishes you for doing so due to how heavily abilities are tied into attributes and the rigidity of the ENCOUNTER system.

Not everyone ends up in a job of their choosing. Not everyone is the same level of greatness at their job as another person in that field. But if a scribe becomes a trollslayer and a soldier becomes a trollslayer their stats will be TROLLSLAYER, whether they're good at combat or not. You can come up with as much apologising as you want to try and explain how two completely different dwarfs with different skills, abilities, experience physical prowess ended up as IDENTICAL trollslayers all you want, but it's still a cop out and an excuse for abstract and simplified game design.

WFRP characters will look different. You can look at a two character sheets and immediately see their phsyical and mental differences. It would be virtually impossible for two characters to have identical starting stats in WFRP.

You could say that a character's individuality is all in the description and RP aspects using chess as an example. This pawn is harry and this pawn is larry. They both do exactly the same thing but they are completely different.

There is a point at which the statistics used to describe a character really do have to take some control.

The stats and skills are how characters are represented. It gets a little old if you've got to say every single time 'actually my troll slayer has big THIGHS for his strength while Bob has big BICEPS. We have identical strength values but we are TOTALLY different.'

That's just creating a facade to produce individuality where there isn't any.

Obviously though I'm one of very few that thinks an RPG should try to emulate characters more rather than less. the D100 system of WFRP created satisfyingly different characters in both rules and RP. There IS a difference, so what causes it? Rather than, there ISN'T a difference, so how can we come up with a way to create one that ends up doing nothing.

Later i thought about it and came up with a method to use WFRP3's rules to generate that difference. You roll a D10 for the units of your ability and if it is equal or below it then you get an additional die, just as if your stat was 1 die higher. So someone with WS 36 would get 3 dice and a D10. On a 6 or less they would get a 4th die to roll. Thus making the incremental changes to stats important and distinguishing characters from one another more. Considering this is a dice pool mechanic, I don't think a single D10 rolled with every pool will matter in the long run.

Hellebore

Emirikol said:

I'm looking at the career stuff on the back:

General Career Advances
-Action Card
-Talent
-Skill Training or (on?) Specialty
-Wound Threshold
-Open Career Advance
-Open Career Advance
-Open Career Advance
-Open Career Advance
-Open Career Advance
-Open Career Advance

Career Completion Advances
-Career Transition(?)
-Dedication Bonus

Non-Career Advances [Nice!]
-Advance Type
-Advance Type

Card Inventory
-[Two blank lines]

That last bit is interesting to me. There isn't a lot of space to write down your card inventory. Does that mean we won't have very many cards? Maybe they just ran out of room and they're expecting us to write really tiny.

And look how far out you can go on stances! From your neutral spot, you can go six steps into Conservative or Reckless.

HELLEBORE wrote: Simply through the lack of variety you get with making it a dice pool system.

Is that a fact?

DagobahDave said:

Fixing presently. Click "download document in original format".

jh

DD, I was counting the lines on the char sheet too. It gives you an impression of about how much "stuff" is going somewhere.

I'm really wondering what a monster stat block is going to look like.

jh

DagobahDave said:

DagobahDave said:

It's a conclusion based in testable evidence. The sort of conclusion I draw in my day job. How you feel or what you believe is irrelevant to the evidence and the evidence re dice pool precedence along with the descriptions of characteristics given so far points to a lack of stat variety.

Hellebore

Well dicepools do tend to reduce the granularity of stats, especially when you go from a d100 range to a dice pool of say, 10d max or something. I did read v2 rules but never got to play so correct me if I'm wrong but didn't most stats advance in increments of 5? So there's not nearly as much granularity there as one would first think. Am I recalling that incorrectly?

Regardless, we don't even really know enough about how the dice mechanics really work though to make judgements on the granularity of the system I don't think. It appears that different types of dice combine together for a larger die pool than just your stat anyway. There may be any sorts of combinations that flesh out the granularity of skills and such.

I havent' played a dicepool game since college when WW first put out Vampire, but if I see this right, the hammer = success. Modifications to that hammer (time to accomplish, hinderances) will hopefully be quick and without table reference for the most part.

I left 4e D&D because it got so frakkn slow compared to 3e's "attack die, damage die, done" mechanic. If this system is slow and just rolling a bunch of dice to tell me how long it took the chicken to walk across the street to get to the other side, I may have to just get on with things..and skip it except in cases where "it really matters." Encumbrance for example, skip it until it "really" matters. Party tension meter: skip the paperwork of tracking it (unless you play with a bunch of autistic savants who get off on 'party tension'). That's my initial impression of the kind of stuff that will proably quickly get the axe in my game..and if it's so interwoven into the system as to be RUBE GOLDBERG like D&D 4e turned into..well, then it will be soyanara.

jh

DagobahDave said:

Emirikol said:

Useful against Khornite cultists

So these new character sheets: full colour and made to be placed along side the career card.

Are they glossy and made to be used with dry erase or water soluble markers? Thus re-usable?

Or are we expected to use the full colour ones that will probably look like hell after erasing stuff a few times? If that's the case, I'll have to scan them and print them out in b&w double sided... Argh.

If it's numbers and check boxes you might be able to just mark scores of various things with dice.

Though that raises the question of where exactly you keep the actual info.

Ok, I are officially confused now.

Take a look at the movie. They're on there. I also screenshot them and put them on my gallery site (click download document in original format" under the broken picture box). It's not super-clear, but you get the gist.

gallery.rptools.net/v/contrib/emirikol7/WFRP3+character+sheet.pdf.html

here's another link that may be easier:

www.enworld.org/forum/4903807-post1.html

jh