I was reading through the monster section of the Tome of Adventures and started wondering about the way that monsters are setup. Do they have other actions beyond the ones listed on their pages? Do they get a basic Melee Attack and Ranged Attack, Dodge or Block? I didn't see any defensive powers are all listed for any of the monsters or NPCs included in the book.

When you consider that these basic cards are going to be in the hands of the players and not the GM, it becomes problematic to use them for monsters.

The lack of defense for monsters and NPCs doesn't sit well with me. Hopefully I'm wrong in the way I'm reading this or missed somethig.

Yeah, p47 ToA: "In addition to the standard Basic Actions available to all characters (assuming they meet the individual action's
requirements), creatures and NPCs have access to some specific, thematic actions."

Thanks, I completely missed that. I guess I'll just create my own cards for monsters.

Monsters and NPCs have all the basic actions. If a monster meets the requirements you could even give them the improved defence reactions. Without defences the NPCs are much weaker.

Gallows said:

How could that be ? Since monsters aren't trained in any skills, they have A/C/E instead...

I use basic defense and A or E to reflect aditionnal effort in defending themselves.

Jericho said:

The rules do state that they have access to them if they qualify. If monsters are meant to have access to these actions, FFG should have included a few more of each of the basic actions for monsters. How exactly am I supposed to track action usage? Photocopying the cards? Inexcusable.

Shadowspawn said:

I play with 3 PCs. So I bought adventurer's toolkit and kept the basic action card set to GM use. The 3 sets from corebox are handled by PCs..

That's great for those with three players...

Shadowspawn said:

Yep. That's how I deal with that, not a real answer like... "42" ?

In fact, players may share all basic action cards easily (there only are rule-reminders), except for DODGE, BLOCK and PARRY... But players are able to share the card and put token on each side of it, in example...

another solution : Someone scanned basics actions cards to make a single A4 page for the GM (they are the same on each side).

willmanx said:

Those are still all solutions to a problem that shouldn't exist.

OK, I'm sure everybody gets your complaint and most of us agree that the number of basic action cards is too small - just deal with it like everybody else - either make copies of cards, custom monster sheets with all the actions or buy a second core set - you can ask your players to team up and get one together. No use for moaning about it.

Come on, moaning is bread and butter for us gamers.

Iffo said:

There is most certainly a use, FFG reads these forums and takes feedback from them. Feel free to discuss what you want, I'll feel free to make the points that I want. You will also notice that my post was ended with a *wink* , as I knew this point had been discussed before.

My entire point though, was we should not have to deal with it, and FFG needs to know that. This was a problem with game... Simply dealing with it and dropping another 100 bucks isn't something someone should have to do.

Shadowspawn said:

Yet it's such a trite and tired argument.

It's like ranting against Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft for limiting their console to 4 controllers and thus shafting families or groups of more than 4 people. Or ranting against Toyota for making a sedans that only seat 5, when you have a need for 7 passengers. I don't see people protesting buying a game of monopoly because it only supports 4 players. Why is this so different?

The box set costs a certain amount because of all the physical components that are included. You're paying for each printing of each card, stand-up, dice and what not. To expect these to be unbounded and available at no additional cost to fit whatever arbitrary number of players you game with is ridiculous. Your ranting isn't going to change the core mechanics of the game. The cards, stand ups, character sheets, and dice are not going to magically disappear from the game nor will they release a boxed set with components that magically multiply based on the number of players you have at your table.

In fact, from a gaming company's point of view, it would seem that the more players enjoying the game the more they money they should be getting. After all, why should a group of 3 pay the same than a group of 6?

I get his argument though. Technically, the box only supports three players for the 'out of the box' experience. There isn't a basic actions card set for the fourth player or the GM, whichever way you want to slice it. If the GM was intended to have access to the basic actions with 'just' the boxed set it should have been advertised as supporting a GM +2 instead of GM + 3 or spend one of the pages in one of the books (or the back of the Adventure book, for example, to cover the basic actions the GM would need. Rather than saying it doesn't support X, it's more that it doesn't support the # it states it does.

Lexicanum said:

You need to relax man. I wasn't ranting at all. People like you really make this forum hard to stomach sometimes. Its really simple,. if the game says it supports the GM plus three players, I expect some extra basic action cards in the core set for the monsters. That is support for the GM plus three players and they don't provide it. I'm afraid its your argument that is "trite".

Alright, Shadowspawn, you made your point loud and clear...about 8 times. You received several tips and explanations on how to fix your problem and you kept repeating yourself over and over again.

No need to accuse anybody for "really making this forum hard to stomach" just because like you (only not as loud) they expressed their opinion.

And now to cheer you up a bit - I made a monster sheet template which will soon be uploaded to Hammerzeit and the SE plugin forum. It allows you to put lots of cards (basic or not) for each group of monsters ... or just have one sheet with all the basic and advanced actions. It may even be implemented into the WFRP3 SE plugin so you'll be able to customize it easily.

Now THAT is good news. Thanks Iffo.

That is cool tanks.

And anyways slapping down a bunch of action cards on a copier (for personal use) certainly beats gathering character stats and abilities from charts and tables

It is a little inconvient, for the dm, out of the box, but RPGs have expected gamers to photocopy stuff out since red box.

...we allowed to do that for personal use, no?

Shadowspawn said:

You know, you're right. It would be good if the GM had a copy of the basic action cards. And I was most likely out of line jumping on you like I did.

I guess it was just one too many times of hearing people complain about the 3 player limit that got to me. That post should have been directed at rpg.net or some other forum instead.

Jericho said:

The rules state that NPCs and monsters have all the basic actions as well. A monster with 4+ in a characteristic and one or more expertise dice could easily have the improved defence cards. It makes sense to give any monster with characteristics at 4+ the improved defence cards to balance the game. Those cards are a VITAL part of the game balance and without the monsters are very weak. But the rules state that monsters have all the basic action cards like PCs, and the improved dodge for instance specify that it replaces the normal dodge if agility is 4+. Since monsters do not have skills, that part of the requirement is irrelevant.

Lexicanum said:

Thanks man, it didn't help that I was running a fever and had the chills when typing yesterday. Will this winter ever end?

I agree with the complaint about having too few sets of the basic action cards, and I also agree that is a good reason to make this complaint here. My hope is that FFG will see these complaints, and include another set of basic action cards in a future product. In fact, I'd like for them to include two, so that I can have a set as a GM to run the monsters with, and all four of my players can as well.

I don't even think of this as a complaint, really - I think of it as feedback, or a request. it seems both fair and reasonable to me.

Venthrac said:

+1

That's fair and reasonable to me.