Hi, for those out there who prefer random character generation "à la WFRP2" and still want to play WFRP3 (my case) here goes a proposal I hope people will find interesting.

My intention is also to give the players some level of control of their starting character but without having full control over it. Also, I would have preferred total randomness, but the way the stats are presented, it could be a bit bland. The system I propose keeps also "balance" as designed by FFG.

So, the system is simple.

1. Roll 1d4+1 for each characteristic. That or your initial race characteristic (whichever is higher) is the maximum value with which your character will be able to start.

2. Roll 1d4-1 for each starting value in Wealth, Skills, Talents and Actions. That's the maximum value with which your character will be able to start.

3. Create your character following the official rules but, when spending points remember not to go over the maximums generated in steps 1 and 2.

4. If you still have points left and all your characteristics are at their maximum possible value, you are free to spend the rest of your points as you see fit, but you cannot go more than one point above the maximum in each characteristic.

So, there you have, a simple random system that still gives players some control over character creation. With this, getting low Strength Fighters or low Agility Thiefs is possible but all characters will be more or less balanced, as the official FFG rules intend.

What do you think? Improvement ideas would be highly appreciated.

Sorry for replying to my own post, but had forgotten to add something.

In this proposal, if you are lucky you'll only have more flexibility to decide how to spend your points, but if you are unlucky you still get the same number of creation points only that maybe they won't correspond perfectly with your career and still will be good at something.

House ruled BEFORE being released.

This is a sign...

DeathFromAbove said:

...that the massive amounts of house ruling that has gone on for both previous editions of WFRP will continue? Cool.

Callidon said:

That someone find it lacking BEFORE reading it ...

DeathFromAbove said:

And?
I find it lacking in many ways, but also love some of the changes, same as with 2-nd ed (and I houseruled this one to enormous extend to fit my needs), that's why I houserule, and will continue to do so.
It does not mean that the game is bad, or everyone should houserule it, it's just not exactly how I see it.

Also I must say, that I houseruled every RPG, and lots of other games that I've played to this day.
Does that make them bad?
Does that make them less/more lacking than Warhammer 3-rd?

Sunatet said:

That's it! RPGing is about house rules, I couldn't have stated it more clearly. A little troubling though; that they already start to appear before the game is released...

And after all I think Jay owes us a session demo video

Well, I basically love almost every preview given so far by Jay, specially how to use the dice pools, and I find most things proposed revolutionary and very interesting. I'll buy the game and my players are already excited by what I've told them.

Still, any RPG I have played had things I did not like and I thought how to houserule them, it's natural and my group is very used to changing and adapting RPGs to our own tastes. In the previews given, I don't like much the henchmen and the character generation, but I still think this game will rock .

Back to my proposal, I think I'll probably let my players choose their careers, then generate their stats with the house rules I propose. That way, they won't know their maximum stats before choosing their careers and this will bring with it more variety while at the same time giving them some control of their destiny. To sum up:

1. Choose your career, roll it randomly or pick 3 and choose 1 as explained in the preview.

2. Randomly determine your maximum starting values for characteristics (1d4+1) and wealth, skills, talents and actions (1d4-1).

3. Create your character using the official rules but respecting the maximums obtained in point 2.

4. If all of your values are at their maximum and you still have creation points, you can choose how to spend them (sort of Shallya's Mercy) but you cannot go more than 1 point over rolled maximums.

Wow boys...

I bet that whatever I can say will put you on fire ! Take it easy ...

I still think that V3 is an interesting "project".

DeathFromAbove said:

Since pretty much every single post of yours in this forum either contains smug condescension or outright vitriol about this new game, I'm beginning to wonder why you even stick around.

Perhaps just to troll the other members?

Well, if WFRP v1 had forums like this when it came out I would have houseruled ahead of time to replace the random career roll with some sort of player selection process, so it's no big surprise this has come up. The game hasn't come out yet, no, but various rules contained within have been explained ahead of time. If someone doesn't like a rule in an RPG, they tend to houserule it. Apparently there are a number of people that favor near complete randomness in their character generation. While I'm not necessarily a fan of point buys, I really disliked the lack of control I had over generating MY character in v1 and v2. I almost always thought up a character concept that I wanted to play ahead of time, which would never have worked out following the official random generation rules. Therefore, we houseruled various creation rolls to give more control/choice to the player (like choose a career, or roll 3 times and choose one, etc). To me, the v3 point buy is preferable to the way the rules read in v2, but that's just me. Those who like randomness in character creation, therefore, are now on the receiving end and have to houserule to insert some randomness into the creation. To each his own, but it seems a minor thing to worry about and in no way signifies that the game is poor or broken.

As for the OP:

Well, it seems odd. I guess I'd need to see it in action. I think you might be better served not using any sort of buy at all if you are mixing in random maximums. Like, maybe going completely random (d4+1 or d3+1 for stats, d4-1 other) then give a single stat increase (or maybe two) of the player's choice with a max of 5 in a stat. Personally, I'm not a fan of railroading players into playing a character they don't want or wont like, which is pretty much what random generation does (unless the player is really flexible). For example, if a player wants to play a strong fighter, but their creation rolls give them a 2 strength max .. then either they'll half-heartedly play the character and probably be unsatisfied, or else they'll scrap that character generation and roll up a new one until they get one that can be the concept they wanted to play.

Necrozius said:

Without disagreement there is no discussion, without discussion there can be no progress.

The detractors are IMO a very important part of any forum (provided the company is interested in feedback that is) without the detractors all your left with is a group of cheerleaders that tell you everything is great right up to the point of bankruptcy. If a company bans all criticism of their game then how will they know what needs improving?

If a forum member doesn't like a piece of the game they should tell everyone. Mindless Fandom serves no one it turns the forum into an unplesant place. Remenber that the online community is often the first stop for new players to ask questions, to air their concerns and to hopefully gain support for their own games. If a new player comes to the forum and gets attacked for daring to suggest a rule is not very good then the odds are that potential customer will not buy the game. Personally i have been turned off several games because of the online communities, when I went looking for help I found abuse and thought **** it I'll spend my on a different game.

The sad truth is that this forum is already displaying the disturbing signs of mindless fandom and the best cure is a healthy dose of scepticism.

Foolishboy said:

its one thing to disagree...its another to be a jerk and come in here and bad mouth something they dont even care about...this forum is for the people that care about the success of this game....not some idiot that wants to do nothing degrade and put-down a game they have no intention of buying or playing! franking i find it rude and annoying, just because you dont like the game and cant stand the setting doesnt give you the right to be a moron!

dvang said:

Thanks for replying to my proposal.

I want to give some control to the players, but without forcing them to go for maximum Strength when creating a character because, let's face it, that's what you are doing when having a point-buy system, forcing the players to min-max their characters... If you are going to play a fighter, why would you not have maximum possible Strength, if the game allows it?... So, in a sense, that's what you are doing with point-buy systems: forcing the characters to take certain options.

Now, the houserule I propose is simple and it gives the players control of how to create their characters, but without "forcing" them to min-max them.

I had already thought about a simple d4+1 for stats, d4-1 other. The problem with this is that:

1. Players have absolutely no control over what they get... this does not worry me too much...

2. The difference in character stats can be too much, unlike WFRP2 where rolling 28 or 31 for a starting stat was really not a big balance difference... and this does worry me a bit...

So, I combine two things: the balanced system created by FFG (I trust they have more time to playtest things than my group of players do) with a simple system that gives my players the "psychological freedom" of creating non-perfect characters.

Farin said:

I intend to buy the game and it is statements like your calling me an idiot, a jerk and a moron just because I do blindly praise every aspect of WFRPv3 that I am complaining about. So well done with your personal attack you proved me correct that the FFG forum is becoming a mindless cheering section rather than a free forum dedecated to discussing all aspects good and bad of WFRPv3.

As for my opinion of the setting I have been playing WFRP for twenty years since version 1. You on the other hand registered on this website on 29th of August this year. Thus far FFG have released very little setting information, so in order to be a fan of the setting it helps if you had an interest in WFRP before the announcement of WFRPv3, which the evidence suggests you didn't.

*sniffs* Ah the smell of e-penises (penii?) being waved around, the wonders of edition wars

Artaxerxes said:

Yeah but my Progress Tracker is bigger than your Stance Meter

Foolishboy said:

i was not personally attacking you, im very sorry for it coming off that way. I was refuring to others that come here, and your statement was toward the same group we just had different ways of looking at it, im very very very sorry for it sounding like that.

Foolishboy said:

sorry for double post but FYI i have been playing Warhammer Fantasy Battle, the table top game, for 5 years.....im well aware of the setting, im sure you know lots as well and im deeply sorry that i didnt clearify where i was coming, i hope you can accept my apology.

Interesting discussion about Progress Trackers...

Now, please try to talk about something related to my original post, as your conversation seems to be straying a bit from the topic...

Foolishboy, he was clearly talking about Death From Above's approach not yours. You're being lucid and reasoned in your criticisms - which fosters proper discussion as you mentioned earlier. Farin was taking a pop at the one line wonders. I can understand you being defensive because people are lumping all those who criticise together as naysayers and trolls - just as there are those labelling people who express interest in V3 as 'mindless fanboys'. But if a label doesn't apply to you (i.e. jerk or moron), there's no need to bite back at it.

It's also worth noting that the Warhammer setting has a lot of different access points beyond WFRP, so it is entirely possible that Farin has years of interest in WFB, Advanced Heroquest, Warhammer Quest, hours of play on WAR or even Shadow of the Horned Rat, read lots of novels or simply only recently decided that he has something to say on these forums. His date of joining is irrelevant to his ability to speak with knowledge and confidence.

However, to the OP, It looks like it might work, but I'd definitely give the suggested system a try first because we don't actually know how much impact different stat levels have yet. The random stats in V1 and V2 could throw out strong characters (40 in everything was extremely unlikely), but it could be that a profile of 4's and 5's in V3 is a monster of a character.

@ Foolishboy

...The sad truth is that this forum is already displaying the disturbing signs of mindless fandom and the best cure is a healthy dose of scepticism.

While I agree with your just prior assessment/comments in the previous paragraphs, IMO I actually think this is the reverse of what is happening. I am seeing disturbing signs of people badmouthing and blindly bashing the game, just because it is different from previous editions. Some people don't seem willing to weigh the game on its own merits and the rules that have been presented to us. I expect the majority of that is two-fold: 1) they are daunted/shocked by the price, despite everything that comes with it, thus don't want to even consider buying it. And 2) they are still clinging to the nostalgic old versions because they are 'afraid' (in a loose sense of the word) of the change. 2nd Ed works for them, it's comfortable, and they know it by heart now. 3rd Ed, because it is so different, means they have to go to the trouble to relearn the game. It's like an old man with beat-up and worn out slippers. The slippers have molded to his feet and are comfortable, so he doesn't want to change them, despite having holes in them and stains. Anyway, I seem to see a lot more of that attitude than mindless fanboyism. I started with skepticism myself, thinking that with all the cards and tokens FFG made WFRP into a boardgame hybrid (etc.). I was like, WTF?! because I think WFRP is the best fantasy RPG I've played (and I've played quite a few). But, I kept an open mind and really *looked* at the diaries and what the new rules provide GMs and players. Once I did that, I came to really like what has been done.

@ cogollo

I want to give some control to the players, but without forcing them to go for maximum Strength when creating a character because, let's face it, that's what you are doing when having a point-buy system, forcing the players to min-max their characters... If you are going to play a fighter, why would you not have maximum possible Strength, if the game allows it?... So, in a sense, that's what you are doing with point-buy systems: forcing the characters to take certain options.

See, I disagree with this. No one is forcing the player to min-max. The player is *choosing* to min-max, and there is a difference. A player might very well not max out Strength, Int, etc because it doesn't fit their character concept, or because they want to make their character more well-rounded, or because they spent their points on other things like Talents and skills, and so on. Of course, maxing out a stat is not always a bad thing either, so players should have the choice to do that too (within reason, of course). It comes down to player and GM personal responsibility. If a GM doesn't want min-maxing, and he knows he has players that like to do so, then he should warn those players and supervise character creation. Suggest alternatives to players that think about min-maxing. But, try to allow the players to make the character fit their image of it. I bet if we asked a dozen WFRPers to make a Mercenary (ie fighter career type) using a point buy, we would not have all of them, or even a majority of them, with a maxed out Strength of 5. There would probably be a lot of 4's, with a couple 5's, and an occasional 3. You can have a fighter with a 3 strength, for example, and still be effective. Perhaps he went more archer, or more for command? A Mercenary with a high Int and/or Fel, a noble's son perhaps, who is still a bit too soft but his father sent him off to better himself. We don't know what stats the various action cards (especially combat ones) utilize, so it is also quite possible there are some decent combat action cards that use Fel or Int or WP (Bluffing in combat, Feint attack, inspire courage, etc) so not everything relies on Strength. His actions might not do the most damage to enemies, but they disrupt the enemy and make his allies' actions/attacks more powerful (for example).

If you really want to keep random stat rolls ... as a sort of happy medium, what about having the players make their 6 rolls for stats, and then allow them to assign the rolls to their individual stats? This way they don't have full control to min-max (they might not roll any 5's, for example), but they still have a way to customize their PC to how they imagine them (or at least close to it). It would just irk me, if I wanted to play a brawny fighter or a bouncer and got stuck with a 2 Strength (or Toughness), or if I wanted a scholar/wizard and was stuck with a 2 Int. Just as examples of what can go wrong, and it makes the player frustrated. If assigning all the stats is too much, then maybe allow the swapping of a set of stats or two? (although I personally am more in favor of allowing assigning of all of them)

Farin said:

Certainly as long you forgive me for biting back so hard.

On Topic personal preference leads me towards random generation of stats. I find Points Buy often leads to Min-Max and I have never been sold on the idea of character balance being all important. However, usually I would allow a Player to pick his Career and if a Player really wanted a Character to be good at several specific characteristcs, then I would possibly allow him to trade some points from other stats.

Although it is against my general personal preference I'm not sure that randomising character creation in WFRPv3 is a good idea. In the percentile game for a human you could roll 22-40 for any give stat, but most of the time a "bad roll" would be no more than 5% lower than an average roll, similarly most "Good Rolls" only gave your character a small advantage. However, In games where a Stat is represented by a small number and you roll as many dice as your Stat, an extra point one way or another becomes very important. During random creation in a system like this one it would be very easy to end up with a Character that is a lot worse or a lot better than average. As I said I'm not totally sold on Player Balance but I do recognise that to much imbalance is a bad thing.

In summery I think Points-Buy is probably the way to go with WFRPv3. At least until we play the game and begin to learn just how much difference a single point makes.

@dvang @Foolishboy

Interesting points, and I assure you I had already considered them before posting my proposal. That's the reason I decided not to go for a fully randomized character, as I don't know how much of a difference there will be between a stat at 3 and at 5. Still, I believe FFG have playtested the game correctly and an unskilled lumberjack with Strength 5 (i.e., 5 Blue Dice) will fight worse than a skilled Fighter with Strength 3 (i.e., 3 Blue Dice + 1 Yellow Die)... If they have not done this correctly, then the possibility of someone not min-maxing his stats will be even lower.

@dvang

About point-buy systems not forcing players to min-max characters I have something else to add... I was not referring to the system forcing you "physically" to minmax I'm referring to the fact that a system where you can assign your starting values with complete freedom does not give you the "psycological" freedom not to go min-maxing... If I can create a fighter with 5 Strength, why would I create him with 3?...

On the one hand, you say that maybe you want to create a soft noble's son or a witty mercenary... ok, but why not with 5 Strength? The noble's son can be a whiner, still with Strength 5; the mercenary can be witty, still with Strength 5... and so on... actually that's what happens with pont-buy systems, you maximize the most important stat for the mechanics of your character, then give him/her a high stat in the secondary stat you use to differentiate it from others... but here is the danger, the system is already "mentally forcing" you to do this, as otherwise you'll think you did not "optimize" your character and will feel as a fool... go on, try creating a Fighter with Strength 2 in a point-buy system while everybody else follows min-maxing and you'll see what I mean.

On the other hand, you state that you don't like someone getting stuck with Strength 2 and a Fighter career and then the player gets frustrated... why? why should someone get frustrated by this?... This statement gets us dangerously close to what happens in most D&D games... people getting frustrated because his/her character is not so cool/does not kill so many monsters/ is not so successful as someone else's character... what does this have to do with roleplaying?... You see, I don't like putting the focus on the "balance of the characters" because it soon degenerates into "I'm frustrated because my character does not do anything in combat/whatever situation"... because, and I think I already wrote this somewhere, getting all players interested in the game is the job of the GM, not of a "balanced system"... If you have a Fighter with Strength 3 and Intelligence 5 it's the GM business to let him shine during the campaign...

Yep it is right! People have started to wave their Penii, but remember this; there nothing that creates a good solution or idea like a good power discussion. So don't stop debating, people come up with the most wonderful ideas in a discussion, because we have to come up with good arguments. Sometimes we realise that our ideas are bad because we are unable to defend them seriously and POP! a new idea emerges based on all our thinking and debate.

Am I right or am I right?

So keep it up as long as we still are mates after the discussion.

And after all I think Jay owes us a session demo video