Mordenthral said:

The Wargor in the demo scenario can do 15 wounds plus a critical with one of his attacks, if he rolls well (3 success, 2 boon).

Vaerun, the Elf Envoy has a 3 T and 0 soak, and 11 Wounds. 15-3 = 12 Wounds. The Elf can be knocked unconscious with a single blow. The wizard would be at 0 Wounds. Some of the other big enemies can do similar. Granted, it won't be a normal occurrence. It is much more likely for it to take 2 hits to take someone out, and 2 hits includes all the mid-tier enemies being able to do so. So, about 2/3 of enemies can knock an average person out with 2 hits (if they don't have any armor soak) assuming they get decent rolls. Still plenty dangerous IMO.

Now, this is just knocking them out. Chances are near impossible that a single hit will cause 3 or more criticals, which will be what is needed to automatically kill someone with T 2. Two criticals are rare, but can be done, so a PC could be threatened by a 2-hit kill with a T3 or T2.

Still, it is much more common have PCs get hit 3 or 4 times, and accumulate both Wounds and Criticals. Also, keep in mind what was mentioned earlier that it is rather difficult to remove Wounds and Criticals. Also note that when applying First Aid, you must choose between healing a Critical or healing Wounds, so it is an agonizing choice. Remove Wounds so the PC won't be in as much danger of going unconscious, or remove a single critical to keep them farther from death and get rid of the possibly nasty effects it has?

I hear you Dvang.

I have no problem with "falls unconscious" instead of a clean kill, the end result is that the combatant is down.

Where I see a problem, is that only big monsters or "hero" NPCs will be able to do an "insta-KO", and only against lightly armoured weak combatants.

This brings WFRP that much closer to D&D (PCs are only scared of the big baddie that does 2-24 points of damage per hit). It's the end level Boss concept that seems to permeate video games and many rpgs.

I happen to hate the End Level Boss myself. Jay even mentioned the term in the video ! So the concept is really part of the design. Unfortunately.

A melee is a very dangerous place to be. Luck plays a big part on who survives and who doesn't. By making rules that contain the chance factor too much, it makes melees a simple contest of stats and mechanics, where on average the same things will happen over and over again... V2 was closer to that than V1. In V1, with the d6, every hit had 1/6 chance of possibly exploding, causing great mayhem and surprise (and enjoyment !).

Do you think that the present rules and actions will also cause those lucky hits that give the feeling of melee ?

Well, even the "little" Ungors can do 10 damage +a critical somewhat regularly. For the Elf Envoy, that's 10-3 = 7 Wounds. Considering they only have 11 Wound threshold, that's still only 2 hits to get unconscious. That's even enough for an unarmored human.

So, yeah. One-hit deaths, or even unconsciousness, is going to be rare. Two-hit, though is quite reasonable. Even with some of the "low-end" enemies. Combat certainly feels about as dangerous. There is something about seeing the Wounds rack up, with the cards in front of you, that makes it seem a bit grittier. Also, keep in mind that Wounds and criticals heal fairly slowly. So, the examples given assume an uninjured PC. A PC could easily take wounds and criticals in a small combat near the beginning of an adventure, and have most of them remain throughout the adventure, if not longer. Thus, as a campaign goes on, it seems to me that rarely will a PC start an adventure without some sort of injury status unless they take an awful lot of time to rest up between adventures.

I've run or played the demo three times. In one the Troll-Slayer died, and in one the whole party went unconscious. Including the possiblity of passing out from too much fatigue or stress, and I'd say things are even deadlier than before.

After all, the unconscious party was at the mercy of the surviving beastmen. In a campaign, it would have been up to the GM whether or not any of them survived. In version 1 or 2 those with fate points would have been okay (stripped of gear and left to freeze, or imprisoned, but not in the bellies of several different beastmen).

So yes, no more massive blows that take out a fully healed character in one shot but also, and more importantly, no more fate points.

Ever.

So, there's no realistic chance of being able to shoot the guard on the castle-wall without him crying out and summoning the rest of the garrison?
I always felt that the Fate Point mechanic was a vital component of the mood and atmosphere of WFRP: It allowed armed conflict to be brutal but gave PC's a reasonable chance to make it out alive (minus a nose-tip and a few teeth maybe).
I guess, this could be easily houserules...

I think a skilled bowman could do what you are suggesting. 5 Agility + 5 bow damage + extra damage for successes, crits and stress/fatigue (which is converted to wounds on creatures.) I can see one well-placed arrow taking out a chode.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but something to keep in mind would be that each 'crit trigger' can only be activated once per roll. This includes the weapons CR. So, in order to kill someone with a Toughness of 3, in one round, you would need an action capable of not only dealing damage greater than the targets threshold, but also able to generate 4 or more crits (including the one crit possible from the weapons CR).

Am I missing anything?

Nope, sounds about right. If Fate Points are gone, then I think that's a very good thing

phobiandarkmoon said:

I don't see any reason why you couldn't award you players some 'save your ass only' fate points if you were running a prolonged campaign. I probably will.

It's not the 'one shot' kills you need to worry about, it's the prolonged fights. In these fights there is more chance to accumulate crits. So, when you finally get knocked out, then you get to meet Morr. Also, due to the inherent difficulty in healing and removing crits, multiple fights, without prolonged rest, could be very dangerous. Sounds... realistic.

NezziR said:

Really ? How is that realistic ? Being hindered mechanically by a wound (less speed, less agility, less strenght) and then dying because of it, that's realistic. Usually, when people die in combat, either they were hit in a vital organ (instakill crit, no link to the persons initial health status) or they accumulate little wounds that go untended and die because of blood loss or infection or some other complication (this would seem to be represented by the present system).

What I find sad is that the "you get your brains splattered by the watchman's halberd" crit doesn't exist anymore. Sure, these should be rare and lucky hits, but they should be a possibility, IMO.

In RL, when a combatant falls unconscious, there is a specific medical reason to that. Knocked out by a concussion. Weakened by blood loss. Blood clot to the head. Nervous reaction to stress. The system is probably rigged to give that kind of scenario. But many times, in a pitched battle, people get wounded and die because of a single wound that incapacitates them and if they are not tended quickly, they die of reasons I mentioned above. It seems this specific situation isn't covered by V3 rules.

What do you do when someone shoots his pistol in someones belly at point blank range ? Even in V2 that situation was badly represented by the RAW.

NezziR said:

One wound is converted to a crit when you get ko'd so you would only need to do 3.

Kaptain O said:

Oh yeah, I forgot that. So, it may be a bit easier. A character with a T of 2 could be an easy kill then. BEWARE!

Jericho said:

Either go by the existing rules and explain (i.e. roleplay) why it didn't kill the guy, or put on your "big-boy" GM pants and make a judgement call based on the situation instead of looking for the rules to do all of the heavy lifting for you. In nearly 30 years of gaming virtually every system I've ever played that tried to spell-out things like you suggest have serious mechanical problems.

Although I think the vast majority of gamers except character death as part of the game, most systems are intentionally moving away from "random death". These days your character is more likely to die because of a combination of bad decisions, unwise tactics, and occasionally fate. But rarely do characters die because of a single die roll or card draw. Some may prefer a more "realistic" system but most players don't want to lose a character in some seemingly "random" fashion; like a single crit, or being run over outside an inn, or massive brain hemmorage, or heart disease. All of which are very "realistic" ways to die, they're just not very fun in a game (although I suppose they are not very fun in real life either).

But if your group likes the thrill of the "instant death" scenario I'm sure you could modify some of the crit cards. In fact, if they don't exist already I'm sure blank card templates will be available at some point in the future and you could make the game as deadly as you wanted.

So, there's no realistic chance of being able to shoot the guard on the castle-wall without him crying out and summoning the rest of the garrison?

Don't forget that Wounds > threshold = unconscious, and for NPCs that's basically death. So, yes there is a reasonable chance. Also, GM perogative and narrative could handle it without doing actual combat.

@ Jericho:
Really ? How is that realistic ?

Umm... it's a game, not a simulation. While things generally attempt to partially remain "realistic", most times they must be adjusted for playability and balance. Use GM fiat if you want to adjudicate that pistol to the belly at PB range different than the rules. Or just say it's death, if you want your game even more dangerous. Ultimately, though, it's a game that players play to have fun. Being 1-shotted is not normally fun (although gritty). It is not a combat simulation of real life. Reduce PC wounds if you want the combat more dangerous and like to 1-shot kill (or at least unconscious) them. You could also say that the crit card's severity counts as the same number of Wounds (or number of criticals for death purposes).

Sure this could happen.

If the GM wants it to happen, it happens, or if you want the dice to determine everything, then RAW, if the PC rolls a Chaos Star or two, then it could happen as well.

Although I think the vast majority of gamers except character death as part of the game, most systems are intentionally moving away from "random death".

I believe the term is "Gygaxian Naturalism".

Assuming you wanted more lethality (in the form of one-hit kills), wouldn't it be fairly easy to say that "excess" successes convert directly to wounds? This allows a similar effect to Ulric's Fury, assuming there is at least one expertise die in the pool.

Similarly, you could allow the max fortune points to be "burned" for use like a fate point, if you wanted that effect in the game.

Of course, for all I know, both rules already exist... I haven't had a chance to read the official rules, yet.

NezziR said:

I thought I read that Comets can be turned in for crits; so +1 crit for each Comet that you don't use for something else.

Mordenthral said:

Yep, you're right. That's another one I forgot to mention. However, that's actually a trigger for a weapon crit though, so I'm not sure you could spend to boons to trigger a weapon crit, then use the comet to do it again. Remember, each effect can only be triggered once.

There are a few attack actions that can achieve 2 criticals (from a mix of boons and success lines) in a sinlge hit, then add in a weapon critical (from boons or comet) and it's conceivable to get 3 criticals from the blow itself, plus one for going unconscious = 4, > 3 T = kill. However, the chance of doing critcals plus enough Wounds to knock the target out is slim unless the target was still injured from a previous battle/hit.

Can spells crit? What kind of damage does typical offensive magic do?