Well, someone stated in another thread that the demo PCs aren't "fresh from creation" because they tried the creation rules and couldn't replicate the demo characters. So, they have at least a little bit of experience. However, I will agree with you that I think starting PCs are more competent. Of course, I think it gets pretty ridiculous in v2 when an experienced character still only has like a 40% chance of succeeding in a task they're supposed to be an expert in. Anyway, the enemies are also increased in power. So, while the beastmen were killed, they also inflicted quite a few wounds on the PCs. Also recall that the Ungors only have 8 wounds, while the PCs have 11-15 wounds. In my first session, 3 of the players were within 1 Wound of their Wound threshold and one of the three even went unconscious from going over. So, it isn't less gritty or deadly than v2, it's just less a comedy of errors. In v2 it was a race to see who would actually manage to hit.

EDIT: Hmm, something wierd here as i couldn'tr see nay of yesterdays posts till I posted, and then what I posted was superflous. So ignore this

c8tiff said:

That's cool if you like that, but I don't like my RPGs to be so restricted and board-game like.

This is why I play several different games. I try to play games that are different from each other so that I can get multiple angles in.

D&D is my favorite RPG. Mainly because I've played it for over twenty years and it is the most comfortable to me. D&D 3.5 was a fun system. It had enough to satisfy my demand for simulation and still kept the traditional D&D feel that I had grown to love. My biggest issue with D&D 3.5 is that it became a broken mess of splat books which players would abuse to break campaigns.

D&D 4.0 came out last year and I switched to it and at first was underwhelmed by it. Mainly because it felt VERY generic to me. A lot of what I grew to love about D&D was removed. Everyone had powers and did the same type of damage it seemed. However as the months have moved on, I have poured a lot of creative might into my campaigns where I use what 4.0 gives me as a framework and my players and I add on to that.

That being said, D&D as it is today is mainly a wargame now. It can be used in other ways, I add a lot of non combat situations, but the meat of the system is by far, in my opinion, the tactical engine. And there's nothing wrong with that. I love war games (that's how I got into warhammer, I play the tabletop game) and I love the tactical engine that 4.0 employs. However I find that a lot of the players that it attracts, from my own experience, are pretty much 90% only interested in just the tactical aspect of the game. When I throw in non combat options, one or two of my players love it while the other three or four get bored.

Warhammer 2nd edition is also a great system. Sadly here where I am in the States, I cannot find players for it. I own most of the books and they sit on my shelf, and even though it too is a very tactical system, the players here stick with D&D. Mainly because a lot of people that I know have never heard of warhammer or know of its story.

And that's where the game really gets me. Warhammer, above any other system that I have run or played, is about its world. I am envious of players that got to play a lot of 2nd ed WHRP because I could never get a group going with it.

The third edition is a new way to play RPGs. And it scratches the itch that for me is a loose narrative system that doesn't rely heavily on tactical mechanics. I love the abstract nature of the game. I love the rules-lite approach of the game. Yes it can feel like a board game. That doesn't make it any less of an RPG.

In the end it boils down to the party. If you are sat down with this edition of the game with a group of players that love tactical style games and need to push the minis around the table and have a very deep set of simulationist rules, this game will disappoint because the party will not be as into it.

In the end I use D&D to satisfy my need for tactical gaming, and I will be using this edition of Warhammer to tell stories. I have a small group interested in playing and I plan on fleshing out some rules that are missing such as magic decks, etc with my own house ruled stand ins until an official release is made.

sounds like a great game , i'm tempted .

I think thios is a better tools to enhance their social experience and the story mode, the intial rolls to oppose wargor or other boss.

The game mechanics work so well with being able to tell a story, more so than any other RPG I have played. We can't wait to get our copy so we can continue our campaign.

everybody saying is truth always a good discutions