Even more, I compute the beastman armor two times? Or I'm not wrong?

1) Leathery hide: 1 misfortune dice
2) Soak? +2 from the monster entry? Or the +2 beacuse it's a monster?

Necrozius said:

from previous pictures it seems challenge dice do have blank sides, although not many, possibly just 1 (??), misfortune dice are presumably the opposite of fortune dice so i think they both have 3 symbolled and 3 blank sides

seems to me armour has both a defence (reducing you chance of taking damage in the first place) and a soak (reducing damage to min 1) rating.

i wonder how these have been applied to the differing armour types?

a defence value only adds misfortune dice to a roll, whereas soak is a fixed reduction in wounds, but even a hit that does no wounds due to a high soak rating still does at least one wound., so is a high defence preferable over a high soak or vice versa, i guess that could depend on what other defence factors (active defences) you can bring to the combat.

Seems like this could be another way that FFG have introduced some tactical options rather than just a plate is best concept...(although 2nd ed had that to a degree too)

i wonder what defence ans soak rating leather has compared to plate....

DeathFromAbove said:

Yeah: I have the same questions with the D20 system. What *exactly* are Hit Points? Are you taking damage or not?

AC is obviously a mix of dexterity AND physical armor, so when you avoid a hit is it because your armor took the blow or because you dodged (even though you didn't use the Dodge Feat)?

Ugh. You know what? I don't really like the D20 system.

I certainly agree with Terwox and the rest about the critical hit mechanism. If I shoot you with a tank cannon the effects of the damage (the critical hits) will be way, way higher than if I shoot you with a pellet gun...no matter the skill. The two weapons deliver very different and greater lethal fire power. Sure, lining up the shot is a matter of skill and yes you could concievably find a way to kill someone or maim them considerably with a BB gun, but not nearly as easily as you could with a tank shell. Heck, at least Warhammer has tried to incorperate Skill into the critical system by making crits pop on comet results. The only drawback I've seen is, as far as I know, comets only come on skill dice. If that's the case then, players who aren't Combat focused will lose out of every chance to cause a critical. Now, crits may not only come from comets (I don't know for sure) but if they do, it will be a bit of a problem for non-combat characters being farther behind everyone else once swings start throwing.

Overall, I like the diary. Good right up. Most systems when written out in a stream of cause and effect end up seeming really complex, especially as you break down each component into it's own catagory. Some are shorter, others are longer, it just depends the detail. Now before I go into this, I have to say I like the concepts...I just feel however, that it may be creating a further nitche to a game that already serves a nitche, rather than trying to be inclusive to a broader range of gamers. The problem that exists, in my opinion, is this system, now fully laid out, is more about resource management than anything else. I'll highlight my point with this:

.
Put tokens on card puzzle
Choose stance and move stance activation token
Get stress tokens on character sheet
Move activation stance token a little more , place fatigue/stress token
Make an maneuver
Select action card
Check action card requirements
Place fatigue token on character shee t
place action card next to character sheet
Add 2 stress tokens
Get dice
Roll dice
Locate at least one success (not 3... bugger)
Remove one damage because of 2 banes
Add 2 recharge tokens on Dodge action card
Add 4 damage because good omen and 2 stress
Add agility(5) and damage rating from weapon (4) and bonus damage (4)
then subtract bane (-1) and monster toughness (-4) and soak value (-2)
Remove 6 wound from beast man
Place six recharge tokens on action card
add one fatigue token on character sheet
Remove one recharge token from Dodge card
Remove one recharge token from action card
Flip activation token on stance meter

13 out of 23 of the steps outlined here are resource management. That's over half the required steps for combat. Grant it, I did shorten about 6 steps down to "get dice", because in every game you have to get the dice then the GM tell you the penalty and roll the dice. It's standard so doesn't need to be highlighted as much as the OP did. The card selection is also highlighted as resource management because it directly impacts how you will manage your resources for further turns. Using aimed shot as the example, you get bonuses the more stress you have, so obviously one option would be to jank your stance meter as high as possible, accumulate a boat load of stress for that one shot so you can a huge amount of damage in one turn. Grant it, we don't know what fatigue and stress does yet, but it's hardly relative to the epic amount of consideration it will still take up when managing this turn and future turns resources. Sure you could play more conservatively than this elf, but you still have to focus heavily on resource management before taking any action, making sure all your ducks are in a row for this turn and future turns so you don't exhaust too quickly. Hence my point, as it has been ever since designer diary 102, this combat system is too focused on resource management. Combats here seem like they will be about account management of resources over action, drama, suspense, threats, and everything else. The only real action, drama, suspense, threats, that will be occuring is over did x player manage their resources well enough to go x amount of turns, not the actual fight itself. It's overly complex in my opinion and I really don't know anyone who has a blast balancing their check book and writing up a monthly budget Yes it works great in an MMORPG because the computer takes care of the check-book for you so you can play play play. And if you start running low, pop a potion of mana or whatever and all is good. 1 Fortune point to remove 1 token off a 6 recharge charge (i.e. 6 turns) is hardly worth it IMO.

Again, I like the overall system, but I know many gamers who won't like this combat approach (including my group, except for 1). And if my group doesn't want to play it, I won't really get to either. It won't stop me from buying a copy though.

commoner said:

That's not really how it goes in practice, ime. I imagine Jay used this example in order to demonstrate as much resourcing about as possible. But really, what you get in your go is: decide your action, make your pool and roll it, mark any stress/fatigue you caused, work out damage, and stick your recharge counters on if it's a recharging action. And at the end of the turn you just take one counter off everything. There's more management than say, v2, but it really doesn't get in the way in practice. I haven't found it to get in the way of anything more worthy, like roleplaying, and after your first combat or so, it stops being any distraction, and becomes pretty natural.

monkeylite said:

This is precisely why I will be running a "prologue" demo adventure for my players, pre-written characters and all, so that they can have a go at the rules before jumping into the real thing.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I agree here entirely, lack of flow in a combat encounter is like poison to a GM trying to keep the excitement and tension high.

While we will certainly see when the full system is revealed, this system seems more fluid to me than WFRP2 , if only because the to-hit and dodge are wrapped up into one roll. This also prevents the "cheated" feeling of a player who "hits" only to have it taken away a moment later by another roll.

monkeylite said:

I would expect otherwise... remember, in play, there are action cards that remove recharge counters from your allies. That has been directly stated. And, lots of things are unstated so essentially, I would expect things to get far more complex than that, as the players have their own character's resources, as well as the resources of their allies to manage.

However, I think that sounds really cool! Does make me worry that people won't make it past the learning curve, but we'll all find out from the demo soon enough. (And please, if I'm wrong about resource management increasing with allies, please correct me, there are only so many examples and such, I am not a playtester.)

Terwox said:

I think this game, just like any other RPG (or video game for that matter) will have players starting with a small number of skills and abilities. As they level they will get more. This gives them time to learn to use each one. There may be a learning curve, but it appears to be assisted.

...and I just stated the obvious didn't I?

commoner said:

The critical chance from each weapon is based on boons not the comet results, so even unskilled characters can cause critical hits. Not as often or as easily as a trained character but I think this is they way it should be.

Amketch said:

"Luckily, the other symbol, Sigmar’s Comet, is a good omen. It allows Mellerion to trigger a specific effect from either the action card, or based on the skill used during the check. The Accurate Shot has a Sigmar’s Comet effect allowing Mellerion to inflict 2 extra damage for each stress he suffered before taking the shot. Since Mellerion suffered 2 stress, that grants 4 extra damage!

Mellerion could also choose to trigger the longbow’s critical effect, and inflict critical damage. Finally, he has the option to use the Sigmar’s Comet as a success, which would let him trigger the three success line on the card. Weighing his options, he chooses to trigger the Sigmar’s Comet effect from the Accurate Shot card to inflict the extra damage."

-also-

"2) Weapon Critical Rating. Each weapon has a critical rating (sometimes abbreviated "CR"). The critical rating is how many boons are required to trigger a critical with that weapon. For example, a weapon with CR 3 will inflict a critical wound for three boons."

So, yeah, it does look like weapon crit can be triggered by the comet as well.

Edit:

Interestingly though, it doesn't say that in the dice symbol reference sheet. The sheet says:

"Sigmar’s Comet: Sigmar’s Comet has the potential to trigger powerful positive side effects. The active player may choose to have a Sigmar’s Comet result count as a success symbol or a boon symbol. Alternatively, a Sigmar’s Comet can trigger an effect denoted by a Sigmar’s Comet symbol."

Maybe is says it somewhere else in the book and Jay included it in the example.

NezziR said:

Yes agree, may not have made myself clear, wanted to point out a comet was not the only way to trigger a critcal.

NezziR said:

Perhaps the longbows CR rating is 1. So in the example, the comet could be converted to a boon allowing it to inflict a crtical, that just wasn't fully clarified in Jay's example, who simply paraphrased by saying the comet could be used to inflict the longbows critical effect.

It's a long shot but its one way that would explain everything we know so far without an ambiguity...

I've had a bit more of a think about the latest combat example and considered other peoples comments about it being more complex that V2, and I've decided that there's something i specifically like about it when compared to V2 and it's the uncertain nature of the bonuses, which i think will make combats a little bit more unpredictable and therefore a little bit more exciting.

As an example,

in V2 it is a (simple) case of checking your WS/BS, squeezing out as many positive modifiers as you can get, the GM offsetting these with negative modifiers he thinks to add, and these two things effectively cancel each other out before the dice are rolled.

I could be aiming (+10) but be at -10 to hit due to shooting from a moving cart, these cancel out leaving my roll against raw BS. If i miss then the GM could fluff that i miss because of unsteady footing, or fluff that my extra time taken to aim off sets my undsteady footing allowing my arrow to strike true.. I'm not so concerned with the description side of things.

In V3, the actions could well add a fortune die and a misfortune die into the mix. Now in V3 the dice rolls could cancel each other other BUT instead one of them may also have an impact on the actual result. The fortune die could come up blank, but a miss could appear on the misfortune die, giving the gm a guide to fluff that the shot missed due to unsteady footing (although as i said, the fluff descritpions isn't my main point) alternatively the mis fortune die could come up blank but the fortune die could add a success to my roll (or an eagle etc..)

It seems that the various situational modifiers have a much more real impact in the game in V3 because they each add dice to the roll and so their impact is obtained individually, rather than them just all being added/subtracted to come up with a final indistinct modifier to the roll

I like this.

pumpkin said:

I agree - it seems this system allows for much more interesting results than most systems in that you don't just get a suceed/fail but also a degree of success and the possibility of added effects (both good and bad).

So that you can actually get some more cinematic results - IE. "Your shot from the moving cart succeeds, but the cart hits a stone and you fall off" rather than just a "miss" or "hit" result (Narration could be much more elaborate in all examples).

pumpkin:

It seems that the various situational modifiers have a much more real impact in the game in V3 because they each add dice to the roll and so their impact is obtained individually, rather than them just all being added/subtracted to come up with a final indistinct modifier to the roll

I like this.

There's a really cool rule that exemplifies this (not sure if its a house rule or in the game) , but for being a bit drunk, you add 2 Misfortune and 1 Fortune dice.

monkeylite said:

Aye, that's just the kind of thing I mean. Even if that is a house rule, it further exemplifies the kind of power the GM can add to the game with the new dice mechanic.

I think I'll be using that when I play!

pumpkin said:

I agree. There is something different between adding a flat +/-10% (or whatever) and adding mis/fortune dice (for example). There is a changing dynamic with the dice that isn't captured in the percentage system.

42! said:

I love this too, and I love the new dice. But a part of me wants to say this is not-entirely untrue. V2 had a degree of success system. You could had said, if you don't make the shot by two steps you'll fall out of the cart or you could have ruled after they didn't make it by two steps, they fall out of the cart. You furthermore could have made them make an Agility check not to fall out of the cart. There are, as I listed, 3 different ways in 2e the same result could have been made if the GM just used a little initiative in making combat more dynamic. If combat's for you feel stale or you aren't apt to add stuff like this into a fight, you're not looking at the potential of any system. If you need ideas, and I'm not really recommending this, or should I say, I can't believe I'm actually recommending this, but maybe take a look at Narrative style play theory sometime. It gives a lot of great tools that can enhance the gaming (especially how to be a GM) a lot.

Sorry, but I felt it was necessary to defend conventional dice mechanics and 2e for the sake of those games, because they are great games and can do everything this system and the dice do, it just takes a little more initiative on the GM'S parts rather than relying on the system to augment that aspect of the gaming system (not that this system requires you to do so). It's just two different modes of accomplishing the same thing.

Now, with that said, I do agree the dice give a direct and easy way to access this type of information without sub-rolls or having to do a secondary calculation (even though you do actually do a secondary calculation - much like a damage roll - with the Boon/Bane mechanic, just you're rolling all the dice at the same time rather rolling to hit first, then the damage). The dice are do make it very clear and pushes the "cinematic" or "narrative" agenda mechanically (the system actually supports and encourages this stuff to occur instead of leaving much of these effects to interpretive choices for the GM (and players) to translate narrative elements into a rather flat roll experience. All in all, they're great, and no matter what, the one part of this system I won't be house ruling, is the dice or that core mechanic...now that recharge rate thing and 5 resource pool management per turn...

commoner said:

I think the beauty of the 3rd system though is highligthed in the (possibly house ruled) drinking rule. Having a bit too much to drink adds 1 fortune dice and 2 mis fortune dice. That mechanic isn't directly transferable to 2nd edition (or other non-dice pool systems), the closest you get is perhaps having a bit to drink adds a bonus to some stat rolls (str, wp?) but a negative to others (int, ag etc) but the modifier is still pretty fixed. The alternative is a really clunky system such as roll 2d10 on a 2 -6 get a +10 bonus on any other result have a -10..

In a fixed number generation mechanic a single influence can only really add a positive modifier or a negative modifier to the same action. It can add different modifiers to diffierent actions, but it doesn't really haver the opportunity to add both positive and negative modifiers to the same action. Dice pools also don't generally do this unless you have different types of dice in the pool, as in 3rd ed.

pumpkin said:

I can see what you are saying about this, but I think you are missing the point though that mechanically adding a positive die with two negative dice is just a "soft penalty" (-10) as compared to a hard penalty (-30) using a percentile based mechanic. These dice simply gives a different way to access the percentage chance of success/fail (with some flavor added in...i.e. what happens off a boon or bane). Banes and Boons remember generally increase or decrease success rate as well (for instance two boons on x card adds x amount of damage) so they function to facilitate the calculation of the degree of success and success effect.

To go a little more in depth without actually getting into all the math, you have to look at how giving a white die and two black die to a single roll works like this:a dding two misfortune dice and 1 white die simply decrease the percentage chance of success by a certain margin (which is a limited margin) based on each die's percentage chance to score a success, bane, or nothing. These factors are calculated into a rather long equation of probability, chance, curves, etc. This is the same in 2e, though the math is a little different. The difference in the result will be negligable however, looking at the most 1-3 percent difference between the two systems.

Basically, there is very little difference between you get a -10 penalty to my 50% skill which is now a 40. I roll a 39, succeed. I roll a 56, fail.

It is identical to this: Success Fail

3 characteristic dice 1 hammer, 2 blanks 2 hammers, 1 boon

1 talent die, 1 boon 1 blank

1 fortune die, 1 blank 1 hammer

1 challenge die, 1 sword 2 sword

2 misfortune die, 2 blanks 1 sword, 1bane

The Boon/Bane mechanic also exists in more convential system, but again it takes the GM using the system to bring these effects across. In a die pool mechanic where the number of successes rolled glean if the roll succeeds or fails, if a player only fails by 1 success you could give him a boon type effect or a system where he succeeds, but does not exceed the level of success you could give him a bane. The same system could be applied to a single flat roll based on the degree of success or failure by figuring how much they succeeded by or failed by. Also, in single die mechanics, if someone was drunk and they are trying to fight you could have them make an attack for instance at a -10, then make maybe an Agility check to see if they are still standing. Boons and Banes could again be determined by that degree of success.

The only real difference between the two are system complexity, access to narrative information, and aesthetics between adding dice of all kinds to one roll versus a flat modifier. Mechanically, it is all the same.

Also, remember, while these dice are absolutely fantastic, to give additional narrative effects and push damage numbers, etc, they are being locked into a convential combat mechanic which will have one direct effect on game play: All dice pool mechanics are not nearly as fast as a percentile mechanic when you simply want to know if someone succeeds at an action or fails. This is the problem with all Die Pools, they grind to a hault compared to single die, roll below mechanics. Combats, I imagine will almost double in time compared to 2e (if you aren't using the hit location system, which I don't). While the Boons may seem nifty handing out extra damage effects, it's really no different than I rolled an 8 on my d10 damage die as compared to a 2.

Again, I am not ripping on 3e or these dice, I love them and I've signed up for them. But I don't buy that they are in any way better than a percentile die in terms of success/fail mechanics (in my opinion they are worse than percentile die because they are a billion times slower - meaning the game has to stop literally to resolve a roll). They are better, however, in how they create a narrative range and give players and GM'S a direct tool to raise stakes, add tons of flavor, and enhance rolls having an impact on their role-playing opportunities.

So its kind of like rolling my attack dice, my damage dice, my opponents dodge dice (if he dodges) and if Im fighting on a tight rope I add in my Agility test dice. So thats two red dice (attack), one blue die (damage), two yellow dice (opponents dodge) and two green dice (Agility test). I could even throw in trigger dice, just in case my damage die is a 10, so add two black dice.

And then you can calculate from what the results was what happened. I hit with a 32, but damage was only a 1, however the opponent didnt dodge and I failed by agility test. So while I hit, it was a weak strike as it happened as I plummetted past my foe during the attack.

Sounds fun!

commoner said: