FFG,

Love the game but some criticisms on your rulebooks:

1. Proofing, for instance your sidebar on your Tome of Blessings book on page 4 is missing Taal. While not the end of the world these kind of mistakes run through the book.

2. You tuck a big important rule on the Tome of Blessings books about the specialty card being free after pages and pages of fluff. It took me forever to find this. It has NO buisness where it resides in a chapter of fluff, as if an afterthought.

It would be wise instead of just saying priest characters get" basics" to write THE exact cards, (that should go for every type of character) if nothing else to help players who might have missing cards.

3. An index would go along way in organizing your information.

4. Your mechanics section explains things well but you don't explain everything, for instance trying to find what cards a priest starts with is the hunt from hell.

I hope other player will chime in where they see room for improvement with editing and layout to help your future projects and reprints.

Thanks!

Could we get some page numbers for the stuff you found? I'm still looking for what actions, skills, and talents a priest starts with.

Yea, probably time to start the Errata.

jh

More examples, one for each of the different rule sections would have been very useful.

Examples normally provide a reference point to confirm intepretation of the rule is correct for the reader. Without them, the reader can only assume his intepretation is correct.

The game itself is great and has some great concepts, but the book as a rpg rulebook, is less so.

I'm sure an errata and FAQ will go a lot to sort this out though..

Nezzir or Emirikol, you guys are pretty on the ball. One of you want to tackle and FAQ and one the errata? I can contribute but I don't think I can take on the full project.

Specifically, it's the very last page of the book for the Priest specialty card rule, in the Tome of Blessings.

i'll post more when I get time.

Sinister said:

Jay is working on an official one already, from all the questions on the board so far, I don't think that many have had official clarification yet (other than the FAST quality, which is in error in the book).

Sinister said:

I already started one. Most of the entries are on the 2nd page of my quick ref sheet. I have a few more entries that I haven't put on it yet. I'm guessing that by the time we compiled and released one, FFG would already have one out. They seem pretty on the ball about this stuff in previous offerings.

Also, we mailed some questions in. Jay sent an email back to everyone (that asked rules questions) saying that instead of answering them one-by-one, they would answer them all in the up coming FAQ. So, I'd say Jay and Co. are typing their fingers off right about now.

After that's released, if there are still questions, we should probably start a 'Community FAQ and Errata' thread.

Also, the editing in general was sub-par. Noticed a lot of small grammatical and organizational errors. This product doesn't meet my standards, at all.

Personally, while there were a lot more grammatical errors and typos than I'd expect (especially for a product this price, *coughcough*), those don't bother me as much as the lack of an index in the main rulebook. I realize that, what with all the cards and such, it's expected that there should be a minimum of stuff that one would really need to reference in the main rulebook. Regardless, the decision to not include an index just strikes me as... silly.

I hope in future reprints they'll decide to stick one (strike that; stick a GOOD one, since there is such a thing as a bad index...) in the back of the rulebook, just to make it easier on disorganized people like me that already have enough problems trying to find things.

That said, I still like the core set very much, and look forward to playing many games with it.

I don't know man, I mean, I see your points, but all I know is I've played several games now WITHOUT having to go to the books for much of anything. Don't get me wrong, there are a few things that are unclear, I've posted about them in the 'Rules Questions' section, and I even commented about the sometimes 'disjointed' layout in my review, but all in all, it's pretty clear, and in my opinion, a very elegant system. Comparing it to some of the other systems I've GM'd, it's a pleasure to run.

It feels a little weird playing and not having to flip through a rulebook every 10 mins. One of my biggest problems with the game is weening myself from being a rules lawyer. It's refreshing and more than a little hard to articulate.

NezziR said:

Honestly, I understand that completely, and I can easily imagine that, once my group really gets going, that we'll likewise not have to go back to the book very often, if even at all. I mean, that's one of the reasons I was so drawn to this system in the first place, compared to say, 3.5 D&D, what with it's volume upon volume of various rule and sourcebooks.

Still, I feel like I have to object to the lack of an index almost on principle. Especially for someone just starting out who might not have any idea about any form of tabletop RPG, or just a person like me that tends to be really absentminded and often has that "I think I've forgotten something important" nagging feeling in the back of his head (even when it turns out to be just a feeling and nothing more), it just really seems like a glaring oversight not to have an index, if only for completion's sake, y'know? I mean come on, it would've been what, two or three more pages, tops. I'm personally more of a "better too much information than not enough" kinda person, so I'd rather have information present, even if I never used it, rather than not have it at all. :3

Overall it's just an easier system than many RPGS on the market at the moment. I might use the word elegant too.

There's places in the books where I kept reading a paragraph then had to go back through the book to find information that was a corollary to the paragraph.

The book is just unorganized to me. It's sort of subjective how a book is laid out, not everyone's thought processes grok it the same.

Indexes can help mitigate that.

So you guys got poorly edited books also? Glad to know its not just Descent and oh just about all the other FFG games also. At least we as RPG players and Board Gamers get to share the burden of printing out all that ink for errata. If you wait for the second printing then you will get a product with the errors fixed. You should know this by now...sadly first printing has to go before a second is made.

Sinister said:

Easy? Not really. It could most easily be compared to the storyteller system dice pools, which are much easier. Use d10s, roll one 8+. That the system. It's not easier than that. Nor is it easier than d20/dnd. Roll a d20 for everything. Add your bonus, beat a number. Roll a number of different types dice, based on your stat, stance, training, difficulty of the task and bonuses/penalties, and achieve more hammers than crossed swords, but also if you have more eagles than skulls something good may happen; something bad if vice versa. Easy...? Not when you're trying to explain it to noobs.

I completely agree with your second point. Also, very basic rules considerations are not spelled out at all. When channeling, what is the base difficulty? 0 <p>? 1 <p>? 2 <p>? it's a skill check which seems to imply the base is 2 <p>, but then channeling would be nearly impossible for starting characters since 3 <p> even when full stanced is extremely risky and will likely lead to the wizard doing nothing most of the time.
Does a priest get access to all basic spells for free or do they have to buy them?
If a zealot takes the advanced skill invocation can that character immediately cast blessings? Does that character immediately gain all basic blessings for free?
What does the judgement descriptor do? Does that mean only witchhunters can take it?
Why is this stuff not explicitly spelled out?

Gorehammer said:

I think you are assuming everything on dice mechanics. D20 can be more difficult a system when attempting to manage 1000s of feats and 100s of prestige classes and the special abilities from someone that's multiclassed 8 times.

I admit that rolling a single die in d20 is less complex dice rolling compared to a pool, but it's really more complex a game by the time you've reached 20 levels of stuff that's modifying the rolls. After you roll that d20 there's a slew of effects that could be the result, many many more effects than this game, all tucked away in books, most of the time that require several minutes to find if you aren't familiar with it.

That brings us to the battlefield. This battlefield is extremely easy. Anything not on a card is most likely a manoevre. No quick actions, no free actions, no move equivalent actions, no full round actions, just moves and cards. The battlefield isn't set up provoking attacks of oppertunity or needing to specifiy 5 foot squares. You don't need to look up rules on cover, concealment, height advantage, flanking, etc....

So when taken as a total game (no just the dice) it's WAY simpler than d20. I would hesitate to say it's simpler than warhammer previous editions, I don't have that much experience with it, certianly not simpler than cthulhu which uses a d100. Then again, while cthulhu's skill system rules are awesome, it's combat is horrible. I don't find it simpler than most RPGs on the market, however.

Gorehammer said:

Page 31, under acquire action cards. It says that priests get the minor blessings, wizards get petty magic and a few other bits and pieces

Gorehammer said:

It states in the same section that some basic cards have minimum requirements and if you don't meet them, you don't start with them. If later in the game you meet the requirement you can then choose to acquire the card. Therefore the same principle applies to zealot and blessing. He can choose to acquire them (costing advances to do so); they are not immeidately gained for free.

One for the FAQ/Errate that might not be editing related; Is a quarterstaff really supposed to be a one-handed weapon?

JacobKlunder said:

That's one I want answering too!

1 to add: a list of the card names and quantities included in the boxed set.