I'm confused about the effect of traits on action cards. A plain reading of the rules does not indicate that they act as limitations. But that can't be entirely true because the rank of spells is listed as a trait. So that's an example of a trait acting as a limitation. But what about traits like "slayer" and "watcher". Can any character acquire cards with those traits, or must it me a character with a matching trait? If it's not such a restriction, what purpose does the trait serve.

Any help in understanding is appreciated.

One example is the career ability of a Troll Slayer. It says as long as you are in a "Slayer" career, which would be any career with the 'slayer' trait. One of the Scrutinise success lines allows you to make an immediate 'social' action. A Conundrum success can't affect 'ongoing' abilities. For examples.

I don't see anything that uses 'watcher' yet.

I understood the traits to be a limitation.

As in only Slayers can learn Slayer Actions. This extends to watchers and spell users. After all a Mage can only ever learn magic that is within his order.

I could be horribly wrong, but I didn't want to use them as limitations as that, well, limits what higher-rank characters can do. You should be able to keep and use your Actions from previous Careers. I thought of traits as just certain keywords that allow certain cards to modify them. The Requirements are the limitations, not the traits.

For example, I think it would perfectly plausible for a non-mage character to "Channel Power". A non-mage character will NEVER be as strong as a wizard, since they don't start with Channelling, don't get the base Petty spells, etc. As not only wizards can cast spells in the warhammer world, if someone really wanted to be some crazed cultist they could do it that way.

Fuller said:

While that is true, it is not keeping with inline with the career system. In the career system a character would still need to join a career that grants them access to learn spells. Who knows, in the future there may be hedge wizard, witch, and warlock careers introduced back into the game.

All good arguments, and precisely why I'm wondering if we might see an official response. My issue is that, as Fuller points out, the rulebook specifically says that the Requirements provide restrictions, but that Traits are just keywords that interact with other cards. These same rules say that spells are limited by rank and order. Well, Rank and Order for spell actions aren't listed in requirements, they are listed in Traits. So . . . it seems a glaring inconsistency to me, and still begs the question as to the other Traits. Basic, Active Defense, etc., all have game effects, but slayer and watcher do not appear to have any effect and don't tell me whether my mercenary character can buy an action card with the Trait "Slayer". A literal reading of the rules would indicate yes, but . . .

Anyway, thanks for the responses and here's hoping for some official clarification.

lqdslvr said:

Traits are keywords that interact with other cards, yes; and they also interact with the rules. The rules say the Traits 'Rank' and 'Order' have a specific effect on who can buy an action and how much it costs. While that makes them a requirement, they are still Traits. They are just restrictive Traits.

If it is a mistake I wonder if they will be issuing out brand new cards to all of us.

Well the Action card, "Shrug it off" has in its requirements section: Must be a Troll Slayer. This implies that traits are not restrictions.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but where does it say that Rank is a limitation on a spellcaster? I thought spellcasters could pick spells of a higher rank, it would just cost them more points.

I'll do some more looking into things when I actually have the game in front of me. But I just thought of the advanced trait. I figured that those actions were available to advanced careers.

Also, basic in and of itself is a restriction of sorts, in the opposite direction.

Fuller said:

Thanks, that's exactly the kind of example I was looking for. That leaves us with: What is the purpose of the slayer and watcher traits?

A question that only the Dwarf and Elf expansion sets will answer most likely.

I'd like to throw out another trait that no one has mentioned: Judgement .

Is it a "restrictive" trait also, like Watcher and Slayer , but for Witch Hunters? At least with watcher and slayer you can figure that those cards could possibly be restricted to the slayer and waywatcher careers. The judgement cards are a little more vauge...but they have pictures of witch hunters on them, so...

Perhaps if there were some rules or talents or something that would make the traits useful (such as "Waywatchers get +1 damage when using a watcher action) then it would be easy to think something else, but as it is these traits do seem like restrictions since there's nothing else to make us assume otherwise.

Requirements don't necessarily prevent a character from learning an action.

Requirements: The requirements for performing the action. If the character does not fulfil all of the listed requirements the action cannot be performed.

p 50 Core Rule Book

I don't see where it states what actions a character can or cannot learn.

Further more under character advancement: Some action cards may have special requirements - for example only wizards can learn new spells.

Shrug it off simply states under its Requirement: Must possess the troll slayer career ability card .

Which means that the action could be used by someone who learned it as a troll slayer and completed the career. Everything in the magic and priests point to these being "special requirements" referred to under career advancement.

zelbone said:

I think the problem is that the special requirement of only a wizard learning new spells is given as an example in the seciton of the rules you quoted.

Ok, that in itself is fine, but it is only an example, implying that there are other special requirements of this nature.

Therefore, is the assumption that the example quoted is backed up beause on a spell card under the TRAIT section, it lists the order that can use that spell.

So you can onyl use spells that have you order listed as a trait.

Bit if that statement is true does that mean only slayers can use actions that have slayer listed as a trait, and also then conversely, if the dwarf moves into a non-slayer career (ok not realistic given the slayer fluff, but stick with me...) they lose the ability to use that action card?

My personal take on it, is somewhere between the two; the traits are restrictive in that you have to have at one time been in a career that matches those restrictive traits, so a troll slayer who decides to become gambler, still keeps any action cards he has earned that include the slayer trait (although cannot obtain any more unless he moves back into a slayer career), whereas a beginning pc gambler CANNOT take any action cards with the slayer trait, until they move into a career with that trait.

that then works for wizards, waywatchers etc...

Not sure what the judgement trait is for yet though!

zelbone said:

Yep, i think you're right in the same sense as my post about the slayer career/trait.

I think advanced trait actions are only available to advanced careers, or someone who has at one point been in an advanced career. The same applies to basic, therefore, you won't lose the basic action cards once you move into an advanced career, because at some point the character would have had a basic career.

However, with this "rule" it now doesn't make sense to me to prevent pcs from buying new basic action cards even though they are now in an advanced career, but applying that rule back to a slayer card, means a pc could but a action card with the slayer trait provided they have previously been in a slayer career, even if currently they are not?? which makes less sense....

perhaps some official clarification would be good!!?

pumpkin said:

Close, but I think you are missing my main point. The point is that action card with the magic trait can only be LEARNED by wizards. Once an action is learned it can be used so long as the Requirements are fulfilled. The Requirements on an action specifically refer to only when an action card can be used not to when an action card can be learned. Basic as a trait directly supports this line of thinking because Basic means that the action is learned for free. Hence, all characters begin the game with, attack, guarded stance, assess the situation, block, dodge, et al. The reason characters with Ag 2 do not take a dodge action card is not because they cannot learn it. The basic trait already infers that it is learned. An Ag 2 character does not take dodge because they cannot USE it. It's a subtle but important distinction.

The rule book does infer that some traits to play a role in which careers can learn what. However, it never actually explains in full. I imagine that there was some mis-communication during development as to where these rules were going to be written, and so they never actually made it in any of the books.

To answer some of your other questions.

If a Troll Slayer learned a Slayer action card, they would still be able to use that action card if they switched careers. The sole exception to this is "Shrug It Off" because it specifically states in the Requirements that to use the action the character must have the Troll Slayer career card. The character would still actually have the action, they would simply be unable to use it. So if a character went Troll Slayer -> Merc -> Troll Slayer then they would once again be able to use "Shrug It Off" without having to relearn the action.

I have not read the magic / divine books as thoroughly as I have read the rule book. So I am not sure how (as in what gives them that ability) mages and priests bank power. But assuming that it is not their focus/faith talent, then a mage could, theoretically, learn spells as an acolyte and still use them if they decided to switch to a non-magic career. However, if power is tied to the talent, then a character would be unable to socket his order talent outside of a magic career. (Of course, setting wise it would be suicide for a character to leave the magic order once he has learned how to cast magic.)

By my argument the initiate career should also begin with all basic prayer actions as well.

Hopefully an official rule FAQ will be coming soon, but likely we will have to wait until after the holiday season.

Of course there are other traits that I have no idea if they imply learning conditions: advanced, judgment, etc...

zelbone said:

Yes, it's clear that wizards can only learn spells as that's specifically quoted as an example, but this should/probably is also be referenced on the cards in some manner, so that we have a way of identifying these restrictions over and above the example (as its an example,. this applies there are other restictions of this nature), and one way it could have been referenced is by having the order listed as a trait (and this infact is listed, I guess it's debatable whether it's listed to back up the example text, or for some other reason/no particualr reason, but i think its there to back up the example). Therefore, the question is can only someone in a current slayer learn an action with the slayer trait.

The rules imply this might be the case, if we assume that slayer is listed on the card for the same reason why specific orders are listed as traits on the cards (i.e. to restrict the learning of them to the right types of pc), but the rules don't state anything about the traits themselves explicitly.

My personal opinion is that probably is the intention of listing certain information as traits on the cards, and it all pretty much makes sense, sort of, if you make a bit of a leap of faith!

I think until official clarification is forthcoming I am going to play that, yes, certain traits on the cards are restriction requirements and you have to be in (or have previously been in) a career that listed that trait to learn that card.

This does mean that a slayer that moves into merc, could continue to buy/learn action cards with the slayer trait on them (but couldn't use shrug it off, for the reason you have stated), whereas a starting merc could not.

I'd like to say that the merc (ex-slayer) couldn't buy/learn action cards with the slayer trait on them, and your CURRENT career has to have the appopriate restriction traits listed to buy the action card, but that would mean that when that rule was applied to an advanced career, they couldn't buy any new action cards that listed basic on them... and that does seem silly, IMO.

Just to add another party into this discussion, until official clarification occurs, I am going to play without the traits acting as limitations. I believe that further careers may add bonuses to people using watcher cards. In regards to magic, I'm sort of pretending that it's a separate system, and does not follow the same rules as regular action cards.

Fuller said:

hopefully some clarification on the various traits and what they mean will be forthcoming in the FAQ. It seems this is a major area FFG have so far glossed over in the rules.

Fuller said:

The beauty of a RPG is that you can modify the rules to however your particular group of players like.

zelbone said:

While this is true, it's not helpful to restate. The whole point of buying an RPG is that you want to use rules other people have come up with working under the assumption that the rules are more consistent, easy to understand/implement, and fun than something you would come up with yourself.
To have a meaningful discussion of the rules (at least in cases of when to apply them) everyone has to be working from a consistent view point because no progress can occur if you simply answer very query with "you can do what you want."

After last night's session, I am finding glaring holes in the explanation of the rules as stated above. For a game with such high production values, this is extremely disapointing. Why couldn't they have consolidated the rules into simple one-sheets like nez's arcane casting cheat sheet. I completely forgot last night that reckless chaos results advance the tension meter and that channeling in the same round as casting adds a <p> to the casting roll. These aren't stated anywhere on the cards , which as I recall, puting the rules on the cards is the WHOLE FREAKING POINT OF HAVING THE CARDS.

Gorehammer said:

If you read the entire thread you will notice that I have already weighed in on my interpretation of the rules. I do think that it is important to reiterate, every now and then, that rules for an RPG are a guideline and can be modified or broken as the situation may warrant.

zelbone said:

I read the whole thread, all I'm saying is that bringing up rule zero, which is something we all assume when playing a non-tournament rpg, is no excuse for a shoddy editing, poor rules organization, or bad game design.

I don't think you're wrong at all, rule zero is great, and it's the main reason I play table top RPGs as opposed to computer/console rpgs, but it doesn't move the discussion forward. Everyone except for the very very green rpg player knows they can modify the rules as they see fit, it's something we can all assume is up our sleeves.

Gorehammer said:

I guess that's the difference. I don't assume anything about my audience. But this is getting way off topic.

Back to topic.

Where I can use traits as restrictions I do.

Basic, Advanced, Slayer, Magic, Blessing, Order, Cult, Rank - All restriction traits

I will not restrict on the other traits because I don't see then matching up to other careers very well.

Advanced : Character must first have the corresponding basic action to purchase this action. Thus for a character to purchase Advanced Block (s)he must first have Block .