Herr Arnulfe said:

How Armoks has conducted himself up to the point of his reply to my post is irrelevant - but for the record I also think he's been very polte about it and as I said, and I repeat again here; 'raised some very good points'.

I was just bringing attention to his overly defensive reply to my reply. In particular his phrase 'I presented my opinion to you, and now you can do with it whatever you want' sounds a little like 'I've said my peace, and you can stick it up your bum for all I care' (though I admit something might have gotten lost in the translation). But either way, I thought was a bit overly aggressive in its nuance.

As for your houseruling statement, I do beg your forgiveness for being so presumptious as to think I could offer perhaps a little help on the matter.

Must be something in the air today

Rat Catcher said:

Don't be so sensitive. Armoks already stated earlier in the thread that he understands houseruling is an option, but that's not his point here. This is what I meant earlier by "circular arguments". He politely informed you that he's not interested in a discussion on houserules - the "up yours" bit was your own interpretation.

Rat Catcher said:

Sorry if it seemed that I became indignant at your reply, I didn't mean to.

Thanks, Herr Arnulfe, you wrote what I mean.

Maybe Rat Catcher didn't understand me well because English is not my native language, so it's easy for me to make a mistake.

Anyway Cheers

Personally, I see DR 5 as the Troll without a weapon using his bare hands/claws. His claws are equal to a hand weapon, which seems perfectly reasonable. If he wielded a two-handed branch club he'd have a Great Weapon, with a DR of either 7 or 6 (because it is somewhat improvised).

I think it's a matter of perspective on the Troll's power and whether it is underpowered or not. Amroks thinks a generic mook Troll should be near impossible for a tooled-up rank 1 PC to kill, and FFG should have made it so in the beastiary. There is nothing wrong with that, except IMO, for beating down FFG for having a different opinion.

A tooled-up rank 1 Trollslayer is supposed to be able to have a chance to kill a Troll 1-on-1. Technically, that's how they advance to Giantslayer. If you take a non-tooled-up for melee PC (or even a group of them) the troll is a difficult challenge.

The point, though, is that rarely are enemies encountered ...

1) By themselves

2) With the party fulled rested/healed

3) As mooks straight out of the rulebook (if nothing else, giving them specific weapons and armor)

The point of the beastiary is a baseline from which to start. If you want a solo troll fight to be a big challenge and a main part of the story ... that Troll should be made unique by the GM. Up some of his stats to represent it is an elder troll, with more experience. Make the Troll into a "boss". This is the essence, IMO, of what FFG wants done in WFRP3e. It's a story directed by the GM, and the GM should alter and adjust anything and everything they want to fit their particular group.

dvang said:

I concur with you.

dvang said:

Maybe you're right. Maybe I blame FFG for creating a slightly diffrent game than I would like to see, but since I'm a customer I have a full right to do it

dvang said:

I compare the 3rd edition to the 2nd edition where Troll Slayer has a little chance to kill a Troll by himself, unless the Ulrick's Fury appears.

dvang said:

As far as I know, Trolls and Giants are usually encountered alone or with a war tribes.

Cheers

Herr Arnulfe said:

I'm not the one being sensitive. I interpretated it how I saw it, namely off handish and very dissmissive, also puts a major block on any discussions about house rules. Now that's my interpretation of it, and you can do with it whatever you like. It does sound negative doesn't it.

Anyway it's resolved now.

Armoks said:

No that's ok Armok, I said something may have been lost in translation, sorry I misunderstood.

Rat Catcher said:

There's a difference between what he's given you to do with what you like, and what you're giving me. Specifically, he's provided a great deal of actual play information, and you've just given me some attitude. So I'd be more likely to take offense to your comment than his, but even that would be a stretch (unless I was over-sensitive, which I'm not).

Herr Arnulfe said:

And you come across as quite opinionated and a touch arrogant. So what? I said I read it wrong, and apologised. Let's move on.

EDIT: When people feel the need to interfere in my business I do get attitude yes. Hey, I could have said a lot worse too.

Rat Catcher said:

Mea culpa, that's probably how I'd describe myself as well.

Herr Arnulfe said:

No you're right, and I'm sorry. I've had a 'long' and cranky day today, no excuse, but an explanation.

HI folks, anyone want to sum up what the different final conclusions/opinions/answers have been put forward for "Monsters are weak or Players are strong?" over the last 13 pages?

I know I'm being lazy but hey, slap me with a trout or two.

Daedalum said:

In a sense I couldn't agree more, enough with the post after post of "i think you are this, or i think you were that"

lets stay on topic to the OP please thank you.

I think what came out of it is this:

Opponents in the beastiary, alone, are not designed as a challenge for tooled-up combat PCs, but instead as a challenge for average well-rounded PCs and groups. To make them a challenge for PCs, especially combat oriented ones, the GM will generally need to add to the encounter to make it more challenging. Options such as additional opponents, tweaking of stats, adding dice pool dice, or adding action cards are all valid and easy methods to do this tweaking. Besides, such alteration makes every opponent unique and 'special'.

dvang said:

Actually we've only really looked at Trolls - in particular, 1 Troll vs a Trollslayer. We should really see how other opponents fare.

macd21 said:

True, but the solution, tweaking of stats etc should hold true for any and all creatures.

macd21 said:

True, but a Troll *is* one of the more significant opponents in the beastiary. Giants, maybe. Chaos Warrior. Also, if I recall from the demo adventure, the Beastmen Wargor was a pretty tough customer. I seem to recall the daemons included were the smaller kind (imps and hounds) so aren't the 1v1 kind of "boss" monster. True, it might be good to do a quick 1v1 test of a few more big bad guys that might be considered for solo use.

I think WFRP assumes most if not all bad guys will have a few henchmen around. For example, our River Troll friend has some pet alligators or something.