The WFRP FAQ has been updated to include more clarifications.

I've also added a new section at the end of the document for more traditional Frequently Asked Questions.

Key additions & clarifications were made to Character Development: Characteristic Upgrades . This entry includes several corrections to previous rules for characteristic upgrades.

Some of the other questions addressed:

• If I increase my Toughness after character creation, does my Wound Threshold go up?
  
• Do I need to spend a manoeuvre to engage a friendly character?
  
• If my ally and an enemy are engaged, and I engage the enemy, am I also engaged with my ally?
  
• Is there any way to permanently increase my character's maximum fortune point capacity?
  
• Do I take a recharge token off the same turn I put one on an action?
  
• If my character starts with Agility 2 (and doesn't begin play with Dodge) but it's later raised to Agility 3... does he get Dodge for free?
  
• Do things I spend creation points on during character creation count toward completing my starting career?

The FAQ can be downloaded directly from this link , or from the WFRP support page .

Any chance we could get a plain text version as a forum post, perhaps a sticky?

Yet, quarterstaves are still one-handed off-hand weapons.

The latest update appears to contain a contradiction to the rulebook. I'm referring to this bit:

(New) Insanity: Strained
Ramifications
When a character is strained (meaning his Willpower is distressed
and his Toughness is fatigued at the same time), an insanity card is
drawn each time the character suffers one or more fatigue or stress
from the same source.

The rulebook defines Strained as being when any of your mental characteristics is distressed at the same time as any of your physical characteristics is fatigued. The FAQ update is a much more restrictive interpretation. Is this a misprint or intentional change of the rules?

The rulebook definition of strained is correct. I'm uploading a corrected version of the FAQ now. Those responsible will have misfortune dice added to their next action.

ynnen said:

Glad to be of service!

JacobKlunder said:

Actually it doesn't say that. It says that if you use it in your off hand you get a parrying bonus.

I think the reason why they haven't made the obvious errata of "Twohanded" with a special equal to the "Defensive" quality (though that part is solely for semantics) is that if you make it two-handed then suddenly you can use Thunderous Blow with it (and other two-handed cards to come), causing serious critical hits, which seems to clash with the weapons high CR rating and making the other more expensive 2-handers much less appealing.

I think they are trying to find some kind of appropriate wording that'll make it clear that you need to use both hands, but without it being a 2-handed weapon with regards to action cards - and that it get the defensive bonus when parrying.

So if dodge, parry and block skill specializations do not count towards the action cards, what about weapon type specializations (e.g. two-handed weapons, etc.)?

HedgeWizard said:

I would imagine they work just as stated in the book - when you make a roll if you have an appropriate specialisation you add a white die . Since with active defences you do not make a roll your specialisation would not kick in. the question has always been "Hey guys did you leave out a rule that says the specialisations add an additional black die to active defenses?" and the FAQ seems to answer that question clearly as "No."

On the first page of the faq it says that on page 80 of the rulebook where it says 'scarce' under Trade Tools it should say 'rare'. Scarce is also mentioned as a rarity level under Services, but here it seems to be replacing the Common rarity level. Is that accurate?

42! said:

Wizards using staff in off-hand and another weapon (like a sword) in their main hand is very, very much in line with the warhammer campaign setting. There are LOADS of pictures, miniatures etc depicting wizards fighting with sword/staff combo (or staff in combination with another main hand weapon). Just because other rpgs use staff as a two-handed doesnt mean it is the only way to do it.

If you dont understand how it would "really look" fighting like this... take a look at the Lord of the ring movies, especially the 3rd one where gandalf is fighting like this against the orcs/goblins when defending Gondor... very effectively using the staff/sword combo. I know its just a movie... but it'll give you an idea of how it works/looks.

Several new updates and clarifications have been added to the FAQ. You can download the FAQ from the WFRP Support Page .

FAQ updates 2/17/2010 : you can only spend free advancement slots to upgrade a characteristic ; characteristic maximum is 6

This is what I proposed here that hammerzeit published. I'm glad designers followed that idea.

• it keeps the bestiary dangerous and balanced compared to PCs (as said in my post, it was strange to compare trolls' or uber chaos warrior's stat with max pc at 10).
• and It balances a bit success rating.

This has consequences for me, as proposed, a PC shouldn't start at maximum to keep an increasing curve... In my game, you can't spend creation points in characteristics : you start with racial characteristics +1 per career's primary characteristic. So I make a low power game with less creation point (7 humans, 5 for others) only to spend through talents, skills, wealth and action cards.

hehe willmanx ... seems our balancing with a max of 6 in a characteristic wasn't a bad ruling

Gallows said:

1xp for us, gallow !! Maybe 100% opposed check will be next to balance combat

max of 6 was logical because of the number of non-written career slots. A lot of friends in France didn't get the point you could use the general advancement slot to increase characteristics above 6. But that is past.

The only thing I don't like about the stat 6 cap is that should apply to humans (base 2+4=6) where the other races should cap at 4 over whatever their starting stat is (so a dwarf should be able to cap out at 7 in Tou (or was it STR, don't have my book handy).

The rationale that it's a cap due to the number of advancement lines feels very artificial, but that's just me.

keltheos said:

But following the same reasoning a Dwarf should only pay 5 advancements to go from TH 5 to TH 6, since he gets a racial +1 to TH...

keltheos said:

I think of the 6 stat cap as more a measure of what's physically possible for the characters, within reason. Somewhat like how it's been estimated that there's a limit to how fast a human can run, hold his breath or how many mental connections he can maintain. And to go above it is to enter the realm of the supernatural or what in game terms we call GM approval required.

I think the fact that the other races have a head start reflects their superiority, without a need to bump up their stats. A human would have to go far and beyond what an Elf or dwarf experiences in order to reach the same level. But after all, humans have achieved godhood, hence it's been shown that in essence there is no upper limit to human advancement.

All hail Sigmar!

Lexicanum said:

This is how I view the cap as well, though you worded it much more nicely than I would have!

I'll buy that rationalization.

But, for me, I see it as a proportional scale. If Dwarves are inherently stronger than Humans (based on a bonus at creation and the fluff/etc) they should be stronger than a human if both have increased their strength proportionally. The strongest dwarf should still be stronger than the strongest human if dwarves as a whole are stronger than humans as a whole.

Please FAQ damage over wound threshold.