"When I was doing 2nd edition Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, for example, there were certain elements that I felt had to be carried over from first edition to make it WFRP. While you can certainly see my design principles at work in the game, if I started it from scratch I may have taken a different approach in some areas. It was really important to get the feel of WFRP right though. I mean, I could have just thrown out 1st edition and done my own thing, but there would have been little point in calling it WFRP then. (Chris Pramas)"

Well this guy has a point I think.

the whole interview in the escapist is here

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/interviews/6727-Designing-the-Dragon-Age-Tabletop-RPG.3

That sentence perfectly resumes the "Lack of Respect" me and other V1-V2 fans are throwing at FFG.

Let's read the whole interview now...

Erik Bauer said:

so, the vitriole again...

Myself, I tend to believe that FFG has probably tried to keep the spirit of WFRP intact, and nothing in the designer's diaries or in the videos of Jay Little is proving any lack of respect whatsoever, but just a honest try of adding some revolutionary mechanics to a great RPG system.

And, on top of that, I am very happy with most of the previews published so far and I am a v1-v2 fan of WFRP.

Well, we have very different opinions then.

Maybe we had very different opinions on what is the spirit of WFRP. Maybe neither of the two is wrong, but they are different indeed.

You know what guys.

Instead of continuously derogate, spit on, and whine about 3-rd ed, You could spend Your time much better playing, making some house rules for 2-nd ed, or another scenario to post it on the web.

It's easy to criticize. What is hard is to make something by Yourself.

And if I may add, I DO NOT CARE about what You say about 3-rd ed, or how bad You name it.

I (and many others) already decided to give it a try, so reading constant "oh how good 2-nd ed was/is" and "oh how bad, and unnecessary and boragame-like 3-rd ed is" is just TIRESOME.

I do own 2-nd ed, I like 2-nd ed, I play 2-nd ed, but 2-nd ed has ended, 2-nd ed is no more officially supported.

It's WAY to late to change what happened, no whining and naysaying will change that, and the only people that are really upset and tired of all this hate and poison is Your fellow players around here.

The best thing You can do to show Your dislike of new edition is NOT BUYING it.

At least wait this another week for promotional event before saying it is bad. You will have a chance to verify all Your yes/no then.

If You do not like what You saw then, fine. But there are some people here that have hopes for the new ed, and want to support it.

I will not try to convince You that You are wrong, and that 3-rd ed is fantastic and superior to 2-nd ed.

I'm not posting on 2-nd ed forums that 2-nd ed is bad, and old and whatever, and that You should hate it, but please do the same for me.

PS: I do understand Your bitterness, I starded with it, but right now I'm just tired. So please, stop.

Sunatet said:

Thank you Sunatet.

I just felt I'm exaggerating and I'll promise to stop if not interpelled again, I think everybody now knows how do I feel and what I do think about it.

But I want to explain the reasons why of my criticizing:

1)I feel RIGHT that FFG perceives the feelings their newborn is creating inside us.

2)Whenever I love something and I care about it I become overcritic as I like it to keep being the best. So all this criticizing should also be read as my hope that V3 will work and will be a good game.

About being creative:

I do have written adventures for both V1 and V2 and I'm in these days thinking about creating my own V2.5 mixing V2, Dark Heresy and V3 good ideas I just don't feel posting on the net right now. My mind is completely taken by the shock V3 is to me.

And yes I DO wanto to make a demo game.

I am mixed in this.I am glad that another version of Warhammer comes out but I dont think that FFG does it right. At least regarding the rules. I hope at least they show us some new source-boxes and fluff which we can use. (like an ulthuan box or so)

To my genesis as Warhammer player: First I was a fan of 1st edition Warhammer in the 90ties. I played it for about 10y or so. Then came 2nd out. I bought it and said: ok, its not optimal but its nice full coloured and a kind of gate tool for experiencing the wonders of the Warhammer setting.

But after some years the 2nd edition game came to an dead end. The vision of the world and the style of the adventures were to similar. It became boring to us and we stopped to play Warhammer. Also the 2nd edition had too many flaws for our liking. It was too cumbersome to manage a fight with more than 20 participants for example AND I hated the inconsistencies of the player - monster attributes. A adventurer could grow as strong as a dragon or ogre in the 2nd edition. What a bulls...

Then I found Savage Worlds 2y ago and my roleplaying world is ok again since this moment. This system is perfect. (Mini usage, fast and fun) And because this fact I am not interested in the 3rd edition for its rules. I am rather interested in it for using the artwork, adventures and fluff to integrate it into my Savage Warhammer campaign. This campaign features a different style than the limited 2nd edition can support. With SW we are not limited to the career system, and we dont have any restrictions in chargen, we can recreate virtually ANY thinkable person in the warhammer setting. And because SW is so fast and furious we can play combats with 100+ participants in under 3h easily. And YES it remains alot of fun even with so many combatants. Think a full assault of skaven on a dwarfen tower. Show me how to do THIS with 2nd edition rules without spending a whole weekend with senseless unimaginative dice rolling. But WE do such scenes in under 3h! This possibilities to experience the setting differently changes everything. The whole Warhammer setting (also the novels and GW/Mythic envisions the game) came to us and not only the "usual" "slow investigation" type of WFRP1st and 2nd edition adventure. There are virutally no restrictions anymore to us. We can enjoy alot more fine ways to play that is was able with the 2nd edition system. But there is price of course: the GM has to spend some time for conversion from 2nd edition to SW to enjoy this phantastic new way to play Warhammer. (the orders of magic for example)

So no question to us. We like to play fast and dirty. No return to other slow blood-less restricted rule systems anymore. In this sense 3rd edition with its mini-less philosophy and cardgame approach had never a chance to be accepted in our group I guess. But what we hope is that we can use artwork ideas and sourcematerial of 3rd edition.

superklaus said:

Fair enough, but you're obviously looking for something very very different in a roleplaying game if you want to run a battle on that scale... that is, to me, playing a tactical wargame, not a roleplaying game. And if I did want to run such a scenario in 2nd edition, I'd just focus on the PC's actions and decide what happened in the rest of the battle for myself.

RE: Sunatet - the quote comes from a recent games article, so it's not like he's deliberately dredging up old stuff now. I'm fairly ambivalent on 3rd edition, and the demos are going to have to impress me to buy it, and I don't care either way

Thing is, if done legally and properly, GW who in turn lease to FFG could allows FFG to license out the "SYSTEM" for WFRP 2E to Green Ronin and we could have Morningstar Fantasy Role Playing!

phobiandarkmoon said:

Well some years before I would have thought the same like you. But after experiencing the difference between this "tradtional" approach you mentioned and the one we prefer nowadays, I can say that playing out such things is much more rewarding.

Erik and Superclaus
I was not pointing at You two, I was pointing at the general mood of dicussion on this forum, sorry if You feel offended.

I posted it here, because it was the newest post that i felt was in a bit negative tone "Lack of Respect" "there would have been little point in calling it WFRP then".
I might misunderstood what You were writing because english is not my native, and sometimes I have trouble understanding what people are talking about.
And I feel a bit tired of all the hate being thrown at 3-rd ed (especially after reading my native forums, it is a living HELL, don't go there if You like the changes, You will be killed, burned, hacked, minced, and fed to the dogs).

Anyway my post is still valid.
And the point is "guys, we are all players/GM's, stop fighting about changes and personal preferences, and instead make use of what we are given here".
I never heard of a game that satisfied everyone. It is no different with 3-rd ed.

There are good sides of this new edition:
1. We still have Warhammer
2. There will be new info and fluff (if it will live long enough)
3. We can still use good old 1-st/2-nd ed rules
4. We can convert the rules we like in 3-rd to fit the 2-nd ed ones, or convert the rules we like in 2-nd ed to 3-rd ed (I even read that some of You used D&D rules and it was playable). And believe me, I will houserule a lot of 3-rd ed rules.
5. Ideas and scenarios are universal, both sides can use them with a bit of work

Oh, and wish me luck tommorow, because my FLGS got their promotional 3-rd ed box, so I might get a chance to have a peek

Well, I read the entire interview, and I just have something to point out about the comment of his that was quoted to start this thread.

The quote is about his style of RPG design. He felt that he couldn't make WFRP 2e feel like Warhmmer if he threw out 1e. That isn't to say, though, that it couldn't be done that way by someone else. Beside the fact that 3e *does* have similarities/features from 1e/2e, and didn't throw everything out. The background hasn't changed significantly (except to back up a bit in time), the stats and majority of the skills are the same as those found in 2e. There is still a career system rather than "levels" or somesuch, etc. Yes, it is a larger departure from 2e than 2e was from 1e. So, Chris Pramas wasn't confident in his ability to make a new system for 2e and keep it feeling (to him) like WFRP. Different people, and different developers, have different talents. What Chris Pramas said has no impact on whether Jay Little or the other FFG developers working on 3e can accomplish making 3e feel like Warhammer. All it says is that Chris Pramas thought he couldn't do it.

So, the 'point' of the quote is about Chris Pramas' preference for game design, his opinion, and his ability, and nothing else. Unless Chris Pramas had input on the development of 3e, this quote is entirely useless as related to a discussion of 3e.

dvang said:

Perhaps. It is an interesting read, however.

What i'd like to know is what went through the minds of the developers who created the 3rd edition of D&D. 2nd was hard for me to wrap my head around (THAC0 was a pain in the ass). But that system (1st ed D&D) probably still has it's devoted followers too.

EDIT: my point being, I wonder how much the designers felt that they had to keep from 2nd edition to create the 3rd.

Sunatet said:

No prob. I have no reason to be offended.

(The truth is that the vitriol is not onesided. It goes from both sides. The fan base is split. Thats a fact. No more huddling. This is sad for Shallya but it pleases Khorne )

Regarding the interview "probably" didnt mean the new edition of Warhammer with his comment. But how can you be sure? I am not. I think that this sentence was spoken with the untraditional way of the 3rd ed. design in mind (and probably his disgust that he didnt get the chance to design this new edition) . Everything else would be "too coincindentially" to me. But who knows?

I agree that it would be interesting to know their thought process and discussion when FFG developers sat down to design 3e. What to keep and why, and what to change and why, would be a very interesting topic.

@superklaus - It doesn't really matter whether in the interview Chris Pramas was talking about 3e warhammer or not. All the quote/article says is that when he designed 2e he didn't feel like he could make 2e feel like Warhammer without keeping the majority of 1e material. That was his design style. Just because Chris Pramas didn't feel he could make a mostly new ruleset for WFRP (and keep it feeling like WFRP), doesn't mean that no one can. <shrug> Just because I can't do a handstand backwards dive off a diving platform, doesn't mean that no one can. Mr. Pramas' strength (or his own opinion of his strength) obviously is not in the creative direction for making a new system that feels familiar, but instead for adapting and refining existing information and rules. Both are valid and useful skillsets, and both create good games. In his opinion, he couldn't make a new ruleset for 2e because he didn't think it would come out feeling like WFRP. Obviously, the developers at FFG feel that they can make a ruleset for 3e that still feels like WFRP. <shrug> Since they aren't the same people, it is quite possible that both are correct. It's also possible that FFG is wrong, but it's also just as possible that Mr. Pramas is wrong.

Personally, I think he *could* have made a new ruleset for 2e and had it feel like WFRP. That's just my opinion, of course.

dvang said:

I never said that noone could make 3rd ed. rulesets. Great Shane Hensley could do it. Maybe Robin Law (if he could ever develope any healthy sense in accepting miniatures in a rpg) and of course I could do it myself. (And FFG can do the artwork and marketing)

What I've read in the sentence of Chirs Pramas was something like "I could do WFRP2 totally different from V1, but that would not be WFRP anymore to my and fan's eyes".

That is Chris putting his skills at the service of WFRP, not vice versa.

Yes, indeed this is a point of view, both mine interpretation and Chris' words about gaming creations. But to me this is a better point of view than FFG's one, and my opinion is independent on the quality of the final product as I have not tested it yet.

Erik Bauer said:

Well, whether you agree with them or not, the FFG designers believe that they ARE bringing in the mood and feel of previous editions into this new edition.

We'll know for sure how grim and gritty the system is soon enough. Like, how serious ARE wounds in this game? How are criticals handled, and what is their impact? Criticals in 2nd edition were usually serious business, and most of my players loved that fact (others actually hated it, funny enough).

The "spirit" of any game lies in the setting of the game, not the rules...

Varnias Tybalt said:

In fact it lies in both. Try running a proper WFRP campaing with D&D rules, and look if you manage to keep the same WFRP feeling and spirit... The same can be told for the exact opposite (Running a proper D&D campaign with WFRP rules mantaining D&D spirit and feeling)

Erik Bauer said:

I think while the rules help, its more the players then anything. I have run successful campaigns and many different systems and settings and have seen good Star Wars games in both D6 and D20 systems as well as excellent Cthulhu games in both D20 and BRP.

Ive heard many people play Warhammer with D&D as well as Savage Worlds.

Ive run 40K (before the actual games were released) with D6 and MEGS as well as seen 40K rules for WFRP 1E, Alternity and D20 Modern.

The rules help build that spirit. Where would call of cthulhu be without sanity rules?

In the end, the spirit is created by the players.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Exactly. And in my group, the players tend to be influenced by the setting and not the rules.

Of course, things might be different in groups where the players are all professional rules lawyers. But I have to say that having tried out both kinds of groups, the group that tends to be influenced by the setting is way more fun and indulging to play with than the rules lawyers.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Varnias Tybalt said:

There is no need to be rulelawyer to have the mood of a game influenced by the rules.

Combat behaves pretty differently in WFRP and D&D, and me and my players can be as inspired as we can and as good as me manage to keep the dirty and dangerous mood of WFRP, but as a combat kicks in you'll feel that with D&D ruleset survavibility and deadliness are totally different and the thing keep changing exponentially when you grow up levels.

WFRP is about never understimate anything as everything can bring you in the realms of Morr and nobody, even 4Th advanced career characters can be sure to win a fight against a mob of rioting villagees. Not the same can be told for a party of 12th level D&D characters, unleass of course, you fill up the village with ex mercenary officials and disguised mages.

So the spirit and athmosphere ARE tied to gaming rules in the same way they are tied to the setting. In fact a good RPG is one that uses a gaming mechaninc that perfectly adapts to the setting itself. WFRP V1 and V2 perfectly managed to do this so I can't see any good reason to change that for V3, a part of course lack of respect and perhaps moneymaking (see all the gadgets you have to pay for in order to play by the rules)

Erik Bauer said:

Absolutely correct. I fully agree what you say about the rules as defining factor for the mood of the game. A good GM even uses the differences of rulesets to his (and so the groups) advance.

About buying 3rd. edition or not. Well I think a gamer can buy the box, even if he is not interested in the rule - IF it contains enough new interesting fluff descriptions and artwork he can use for his own campaign. Additonally it would be interesting what the difference between the mood of the old and new version is. (just academic interest and curiosity how the designers create their own vision of the setting) Possibly there is even for some GMs a chance to "learn" something?