Gorehammer said:

My personal opinion on this is that this is not an MMO where every "class" needs to be balanced against the other. Some careers will excel at doing things like dealing damage. Others might be better at intrigues. Some might have criminal ties that allow them access to special resources while others don't. What if someone is playing a weak but intelligent student who has little to no fighting skills? Should he be balanced for combat too?

Also, do keep in mind that our first view of magic is very limited, both in terms of spells, and also in power.

UncleArkie said:

You could simulate a High Elven mage by letting your better half choose any magical spell instead of just one Order. It wouldn't be High Magic, but it would represent their ability with more than one wind.

HedgeWizard said:

I agree. Currently, magic feels like it's been returned more to a V1 state. Rank 1 and 2 spells (which are all we've seen) are okay but not overwhelming. But that is not to say that we won't see Rank 3+ spells that will be insane in the future.

It would be nice, however, if the Wizard could do something with that extra Power, such as a generic effect to push it into a spell for +1 damage or something.

But also note that a trollslayer can be stripped of his weapons whereas a Wizard will generally always have access to magic. A situational advantage for sure but a pretty huge one when it counts.

My only complaint about magic is that is seems really hard to miscast.

We haven't had a miscast as of yet in my group and we have a bright wizard who loves to blow things up. As for the magic damage output I must say that she does a fair amount of it, if its better or worse than the mercenary I can't say, but its still "hot". I would like to see an over channel mechanic in the game, so that excess power can be used for something fun.

Also remember that the wizard can channel and cast in the same round by first channeling and once that is done adding a a <P> to the spell dice pool.

Fascinating discussion I have to say, and most of the thing I feel pain with have already been said. I especially agree with the parts of Magic.

One thing I learned only here is about the yellow dice. I interpreted the Core Rulebook in the way that training would generally grant yellow dice, not white ones. So the rules seem to be a bit misleading. That said I still have no real problems with the way the rules are structurized, perhaps because I do own many FFG games and am used to this style.

Coming from Dark Eye and AD&D I at a vast point have to agree with previous posts about the depth of characters. It really is a fact that many characters are quite similar and lack the sharp edges to round them against each others. This becames especially lame when you start with career changes, because e.g. switching from Mercenary to RoadWarden just isn't much of a change...

My main point of criticism is the set that is available by now. What I would hope for next is a vast expansion that only contains careers (basic as well as loads of advanced and higher advanced ones), Talents, Actions, Skills, etc. and no new rules. We need to have the other magic orders included, the other priest casts available, perhaps a high elve mage, halflings, etc. as well as higher level spells, more spells, perhaps even spells/charms that work same for different orders. Bringing in the "small but vicious dog" in the Adventurers toolkit is nice, but there are many other things we still lack that should come first...

Cheers

Lucifer

Along those lines, more career-specific rules could have solved a lot of issues with careers seeming the same. D&D4e has done this masterfully.

jh

Seems to many threads can confuse people

Page 16 main rule book Skills and expertise Yellow dice symbol for training and white dice symbol for specialisation.

Very clear in each section.

I will probably end up offending some one here but thats not my intention as I have found the rulebook to have most of the answers if you have read it fully, most game book are set up to skip and jump to sections but as this one had half the rules on cards I read the whole book which is not that big to be honest.

I still feel a bit annoyed about the lack of preist starting skills as half the spell cards are for preists but the underlying feeling from players etc is priests shoudl not get as easy access as wizards, when mechanically the game content seems to reflect the opposite.

as far as a starter set goes it most of the stuff is good but I tend to agree that the careers themselves lack any differential especially if you do not take the action cards traits to mean exclusive to that career, that roadwarden must have been trained by a waywatcher as thats a Bullseye he just pulled off.

But thats easy enough to house rule anyway

My biggest issue is with othe over "Basic set" feeling I get from the "Core rules". Which maybe, I suppose is a "given". But as the game stands, and with future rules being added, it really makes planning for the long term difficult.

The sooner we get an idea of what the "Whole" game looks like, the happier I will be.

Parzival said:

While I agree that we need support for longer term campaigns sooner rather than later, it is clear that the game is designed to be infinitely expandable. As long as supplements continue to sell and it remains profitable to release them, the game will never be complete, so we'll never have an idea of what the "whole" game looks like until they stop making supplements for it.

My concern...

Having a chunk of the rules on cards is a great idea for a boardgame or a 'limited growth' game. However, with just the core and AT, I've noticed that having stacks of cards is getting unwieldy (it doesnt help that I have the FFG sleeves on the cards...making the cards slide around and fall easily). I'm worried that after a few expansions, the wounds stack will be too large.

Also, in 'standard' rpgs, being able to reference abilities in a single book (in which the abilities are alphabetized) is at times easier to work with. When someone generates a new character, having to thumb through all the cards can be a bit time consuming.

So while the card mechanic has its plusses, I'm starting to see its drawbacks as well.

HedgeWizard said:

I'm not arguing for balance. I'm arguing for a proportional return for risk. Don't you agree that if a character has to do more for an effect, that effect should be better than an effect generated by a character that didn't have to jump through that particular hoop?

HorusZA said:

This is one of my main issue with the current game. The other being exploding damage was removed.

I want severed limbs, heads and bleeding to death to be mechanically represented.

Heh. Yeah, the ever exapanding pile of cards leads to an entirely new meaning of "rules bloat".

And my "big" issue of a game where the rules are parced out over time is, while in theory it is ever expandable, it is also possible it will suffer a premature death, and we will be left with an incomplete system....

Parzival said:

While a premature death is a valid concern, I think that is true of most games these days. With few exceptions, most RPGs are not complete games in one book/box since the publisher normally wants to continue to sell product. The easiest way is to ensure that the "core" book is not complete. Trying to produce supplements for a game that is already considered "complete" by most is much more difficult to do profitably.

I agree with Mac about the expandability. It's quite common on many RPGs. (I am most of the time playing Dark Eye... Many books and Boxes...) The main issue I see with this, knowing FFG very well by now, is that an RPG like this is exactly between what they have done to date. I mean... on one side you have LCGs and CMG and stuff like that, where the game is meant to be developed bit by bit, with this being part of the fun of it. That's not really feasible for an RPG, at least not in the beginning where you need a massive foundation to bring players in. Also an addition to an LCG is much less effort than one for an RPG. On the other extreme you have complex boardgames like Descent, that have the strong basis you would need for an RPG, but are made only for a certain number of expansions, with every expansion being a big one. That approach would perhaps have been feasible for WFRP, but would have been time consuming and cost intensive, because the box would have had to contain about 5 times as much as it did. So right now we are somewhere in the middle of both as I said... With a corebox that's (as we say in German) too little to live but too much to die, a first expansion that doesn't really help (and reminds me more of an LCG expansion...), and no real public plan what is to come. Now knowing that FFG needs about 2 to 3 months from first announcement to final publication I would not expect any major upgrade pack before March 2010, and I am pretty afraid that many of the people now playing will have stopped playing by then.

One comment about Adventures and locations: That's one where I have to disagree. While it is nice to have background material with Maps, Charts, Building plans, etc. it's only partially a problem. An overview map is in the book, that gives you enough to start with and buildings you can take from any other RPG as well, they are not different in the Warhammer universe. The missing rules on the other hand you can't easily replace....

So long, Lucifer

Gorehammer said:

I actually don't; at least not to the extent you are suggesting. I find it completely reasonable given this setting, that some people are going to have to try harder to get less. As a GM with a player in that class of careers, I reward them for roleplaying, and they certainly excel in other areas of the game (beyond slinging spells and doing damage).

In the case we're discussing - the power level of a wizard compared with the risk & cost of casting - I feel it appropriate to the setting that apprentice wizards and journeyman have not-so-powerful spells that require effort and concentration to cast, meanwhile Tzeentchian curses, miscasts, insanities and possibly death await. I have some confidence that as they reach greater power levels, their competency will grow significantly, as will their ability to either do damage or affect the storyline (by casting spells that resolve other kinds of tests or gain knowledge).

Zug said:

Just photocopy them and put them in a book for reference. D&D 4e seems to be on this same route, but I've not heard a lot of worry about it yet. That's probably because all of the "cards" appear in the rulebook first and then you buy the cards seperately. With WFRP, we're buying the cards first..and I don't think they'll ever appear as rules in a book.

jh

HedgeWizard said:

If ANY of what you just mentioned was actually in the game, you might have a point. But it's not. It's impossible to evaluate something on the basis of what might be. And you also brought up a point I forgot about, that at least 1/8 of the time magic generates a critical fail that other actions don't. Where's the value for this added risk? Isn't one of the themes of the game? Isn't the whole point of magic in the setting to deal with the theme of attaining power at the risk of your mortal body and immortal soul? But there's no power. Most of the magical effects show up on other mundane action cards or skill uses. All that you're getting in return for using magic is a ton of potential downsides and the ability to call your actions magical.

Well, the simple fact is, at t this point all any one can do is go by what "might be". Like I said before..what the future expansions for the game will bring is vague at best.

Gorehammer said:

You're looking for "value for risk" in the mechanics. I am saying I found value in the roleplaying part of these careers. The setting, as defined by over two decades of WFRP and referred to in the ToM is that magic is a very chancy affair, and might cost your immortal soul either at the hands of the magic directly, or from an overzealous witch hunter.

Of COURSE I have no idea what is in store for magic users, but I can make some pretty good guesses based on what has come before, and I am willing to trust FFG will increase power level appropriately (they have suggested as much in the recent weeks).

You seem to equate power equivalency to mechanical effects, particularly combat effects and dealing damage. I personally don't feel that is the sum-total of the use of a wizard. Case in point, my PCs came across a mass of greenskins. The party had to engage them to rescue some other folks, but couldn't take on the entire mass. The grey wizard used her cantrips very effectively to create distractions and break up the greenskins effectively halving their fighting numbers. How long will it take a slayer to equivalently half several squads of greenskins?

Let's also not forget that she's just an apprentice. A student. She's not a fighter. She's into gathering intelligence and using misdirection. She's also the only person in the party who can read. There's a whole lot of value in there that you don't appear to be seeing because you are focused on mechanical effects only. We obviously disagree on this point, though, which is fine.

PrinceLucifer said:

It's interesting that WFRP3 isn't the only RPG to be following this trend.

The Dragon Age RPG soon to be released by Green Ronin is going to be 4 boxes, each covering 5 levels of progression and published hopefully 6 months apart. I haven't heard of any releases scheduled between the boxes, but there should be some scenarios or something to bridge the gap between releases.

Hackmaster Basic which is already out is a book covering the first 5 levels of play with Advanced Hackmaster coming out probably middle to late 2010. However Kenzer has two periodicals, Knights of the Dinner Table and Hackmaster Journal in which they have been publishing tons of additional content to bridge the gap between Basic and Advanced. They are also releasing an introductory campaign in March, so bridging the gap has been easier, but I have been planning on holding off on starting a HMB campaign until March.

The kicker is definitely going to be bridging the gap between major releases with WFRP3 and here is where FFG may have shot themselves in the foot, especially with new players. So far we have tightly focused story adventures, all the rules on cards, not too much "sandbox material" if you don't already have a box or four of WFRP product in your closet, it's impossible to release downloadable mechanical content unless they want people to print their own cards, so that leaves adventures and background articles. If they can keep those coming, they might be able to keep the new blood interested, but this isn't a board game, you just can't keep playing it again and again with the rules in the box. You need content. There's enough tips in there to help a new GM create a WFRP adventure but the poor organization of the rules works against the fledgling GM. IMO, the first thing FFG needs to do is have a free download "How to design a WFRP3 adventure", get a printed version of it and shoot that out free to gameshops.

Like others here, I'm skeptical about the long-term retention of the new blood with the game as it is and shadowy schedule.

HedgeWizard said:

Right, but my point is that taking the student career, for example, affords you the same roleplaying opportunities without having to use two recharge mechanics for your action cards. I'm not talking about combat efficacy, i'm talking about overall mechanical efficacy. Reading is a mechanical bonus. It's a rule that allows you to do something other characters can't do. If the grey wizard isn't a fighter, that's fine, don't compare it to other fighters. Compare it instead to other intelligence gatherers. I think you'll find that because the non-magic action cards allow for mechanical effects that are very similar to spells that there's no upside to using the spells, and therefore no reason to put your character at risk. It's a design short-coming of the game. Magic in the warhammer setting is powerful, it always has been, and it's just not there yet in this version.
Maybe the spell cards in upcoming expansions will pull ahead of the non-magic action cards, but for right now there's an unnecessary balance. And sadly, this has turned two of my players completely off the game, basically turning my game into a $100 door stop.

My thanks for your thoughts

Lord Kruge said:

I think it's a GREAT idea to do that. D&D pioneered it back in the day with Basic/Expert/Companion/Masters/Immortals. That vertical model (based on character power) is different from the "horizontal" model that is used now. Now it's just a haphazard release of a few products here and there. MUCH less organized the way that it is now. To do it over again, in the vertical model, it would have been released like this:

Core Basic Set (Covers basic races/careers. As now, only a couple advanced "teaser" careers). No advanced cards/talents.

Core Basic Expansion set (covers new or fringe basic races/careers)

Advanced Set (Covers coreAdvanced Careers)

Advanced expansion set (covers fringe advanced careers)

Scenarios: Basic or Advanced

I'm a fan of boxed sets in general. I enjoyed many of the old school box sets put out in the 80s and 90s. Glad that's coming back in fashion.