I love this:
It gives the bad guys some cool mechnical things to do during play.
New nemesis rules rock
Yes, simple and good rules.
Similar rules will come for the organisations I think. But with a little creativity I think we will be able to create organisation sheets for ... everything.
Alchimist Guild, Thieves Guild, norsemen clan... RPG Producer ect.
I'll directly try it with the baddies in Eye for an Eye...
Hi
I am not sure about this....
I like the idea but its tracking an organisation thats something i would do behind a screen why would i need tokens to do that if im the only one seeing it.
Or am i missing something!!!!
Sinister said:
I love this:
It gives the bad guys some cool mechnical things to do during play.
I just see a NPC party sheet. Some rules are on there yes, but have I missed something else than the two sides of that card?
Gallows said:
Sinister said:
I love this:
It gives the bad guys some cool mechnical things to do during play.
I just see a NPC party sheet. Some rules are on there yes, but have I missed something else than the two sides of that card?
I assume... I hope, that there are more rules, otherwise it's really just a party sheet for the baddies with flashy design. Hmm...
Consider that like a customized progress tracker for your villains' guild. I think it's cool.
I'm interested to see exactly where they take this as well. I think it has the potential to be something pretty cool. It's basically like an expanded Progress Tracker with a few more inspirational widgets to help the GM think about what certain NPC groups are up to.
It is handy for the GM to track how the PCs have influenced the power of the NPC enemy organization. Like a lot of WFRP 3e, it's a good visual tool for at-a-glance status during the game. Besides, it adds some additional effects and bonuses to the enemy minions. It's another way to make the Skaven/Cultists/etc different from other ones, just by belonging to a different organization/cult.
Also note, this diary is basically only a brief overview of the Nemesis organization sheet. It doesn't cover the actual Nemesis boss and his rules/bonuses or other things in the GM toolkit.
Lautrer said:
I assume... I hope, that there are more rules, otherwise it's really just a party sheet for the baddies with flashy design. Hmm...
There's a lot of flashy in WFRP3 and I'm still waiting for the substance to show up.
Lots of people disagree with me, but that's just how I feel. I don't see the massive innovations that everyone is talking about. It seems like smoke and mirrors more than anything else. Adding rules to cards that could have easily been in a rulebook is not innovative. Placing careers on cards instead of in rulebooks (same thing.) The dice have some promise to them, but I don't think the rules go into enough detail to really explain how the mechanic works and how you really gain anything at all from adding one or two misfortune dice or challenge dice to the game.
I asked questions about how the impacts of adding a misfortune die or extra challenge die could impact the rolls in the game and got told multiple times that I just needed to play a couple of times to see how it worked. That doesn't work for me. I'd like to know my chances of accomplishing something before I attempt it when I play a game. It helps me to weigh my options. If I'm playing DH, I know that I roll a 53 or less on the percentile dice and I hit with my hellpistol. In WFRP3 it's not clear at all. If I'm rolling 3 blue dice, 2 red dice, 1 white dice, 1 black dice, 1 yellow dice and 2 purple dice, what are my chances of success? Not so simple is it?
I do hope that when they publish more materials that the meat of the game starts to show through.
Right now, I'm completely not impressed.
LeBlanc13 said:
I asked questions about how the impacts of adding a misfortune die or extra challenge die could impact the rolls in the game and got told multiple times that I just needed to play a couple of times to see how it worked. That doesn't work for me. I'd like to know my chances of accomplishing something before I attempt it when I play a game. It helps me to weigh my options. If I'm playing DH, I know that I roll a 53 or less on the percentile dice and I hit with my hellpistol. In WFRP3 it's not clear at all. If I'm rolling 3 blue dice, 2 red dice, 1 white dice, 1 black dice, 1 yellow dice and 2 purple dice, what are my chances of success? Not so simple is it?
You shouldn't be playing v3, then. I'm not saying 'well, don't play it then' in a snippy way, I just mean that v3 is really not the game for people who need to know their exact chances of success for various options. It just doesn't work like that for v3. Even if you bring a computer to the game, it would still be a pain to work it out, and weigh your options, although possible, I suppose.
The game just uses a system which relies more on experience and intuition than math. You know that more whites are good, more blacks are bad. Having high characteristics is good, high challenge, bad, lots of training very good, etc. it works fine if you're prepared to let intuition and feel take over.
It's not a fault, it's a taste thing, and if that ethos is not to your taste then that is a fundamental barrier to enjoyment of the game. More materials would seem to me to be irrelevant if you can't get past the core mechanic.
monkeylite said:
LeBlanc13 said:
I asked questions about how the impacts of adding a misfortune die or extra challenge die could impact the rolls in the game and got told multiple times that I just needed to play a couple of times to see how it worked. That doesn't work for me. I'd like to know my chances of accomplishing something before I attempt it when I play a game. It helps me to weigh my options. If I'm playing DH, I know that I roll a 53 or less on the percentile dice and I hit with my hellpistol. In WFRP3 it's not clear at all. If I'm rolling 3 blue dice, 2 red dice, 1 white dice, 1 black dice, 1 yellow dice and 2 purple dice, what are my chances of success? Not so simple is it?
You shouldn't be playing v3, then. I'm not saying 'well, don't play it then' in a snippy way, I just mean that v3 is really not the game for people who need to know their exact chances of success for various options. It just doesn't work like that for v3. Even if you bring a computer to the game, it would still be a pain to work it out, and weigh your options, although possible, I suppose.
The game just uses a system which relies more on experience and intuition than math. You know that more whites are good, more blacks are bad. Having high characteristics is good, high challenge, bad, lots of training very good, etc. it works fine if you're prepared to let intuition and feel take over.
It's not a fault, it's a taste thing, and if that ethos is not to your taste then that is a fundamental barrier to enjoyment of the game. More materials would seem to me to be irrelevant if you can't get past the core mechanic.
I agree with monkey. I don't want to know my exact odds of doing something as it makes me start to think as a player and not a character. Also I think the whole "smoke and mirrors" comment is wrong. Moving rules to cards is a good move as it leaves all the rules out in the open and in play without having to look up materials.
I don't know who talks about "massive innovation", but I talk about making one step to a kind of different way to play RPG. Still, RPG pen and paper is RPG pen and paper. As a GM, I have never opened my Rulebook and I've run 5 WFRP3 sessions. That's a lot ! Moreover the game is probably twice faster than d20 (and I've got a looong GM experience in such rpgs), so I may put a lot of story... running really fast NPC's turns... cool.
Other players of mine were saying the same thing about shiny bits and stuffs... I may agree but I tested it with beginner RPGers who haven't known the old times like us (WEG, ad&d, WFRP1, etc...) and they really liked that aspect. Still all my experienced players have noticed the quality of the dice system, and the collaboratives elements (party sheet, talent share, tension meter shared fortune, etc...)
If you look for stats, some of us around here have done stats. As there are dices, there are probabilities. There you are.
peace (and also Good Gaming as Mal Reynold is used to say 
).
monkeylite said:
You shouldn't be playing v3, then. I'm not saying 'well, don't play it then' in a snippy way, I just mean that v3 is really not the game for people who need to know their exact chances of success for various options. It just doesn't work like that for v3. Even if you bring a computer to the game, it would still be a pain to work it out, and weigh your options, although possible, I suppose.
The game just uses a system which relies more on experience and intuition than math. You know that more whites are good, more blacks are bad. Having high characteristics is good, high challenge, bad, lots of training very good, etc. it works fine if you're prepared to let intuition and feel take over.
It's not a fault, it's a taste thing, and if that ethos is not to your taste then that is a fundamental barrier to enjoyment of the game. More materials would seem to me to be irrelevant if you can't get past the core mechanic.
I appreciate your thoughts Monkeylite. I really am trying hard to appreciate this game, but at every turn, I end up having issues. You may be right that this game just isn't for me.
I don't begrudge those that love it. I'm just not seeing the same things that they do.
sorry dude, I edited my message to expand a bit my though, because I understand your point, and other players of mine share it partially...
please take a look again to my upper post... it might be interesting.
willmanx said:
sorry dude, I edited my message to expand a bit my though, because I understand your point, and other players of mine share it partially...
please take a look again to my upper post... it might be interesting.
I read it, but it really doesn't help me to boil down my final chance of success on a roll, just to know what each dice has a percentage chance to come up success, boon, bane, or failure.
I'm thinking more and more that my investment was for naught. I might have to stick to V2. I will definitely port over the tracker tools to my game and I do enjoy the GM sections of the Tome of Adventure rulebook. Very insightful text included to help a GM run a game. Possibly might use the range system, but I'm still not sold on that one either. Over all, I can use some of the stuff to make a V2 game run easier, but not sure it was worth the cover price.
Regarding the "Massive Innovations" Willmanx, most of the reviews of this game on various websites talk about this game as the second coming of the RPG. Everything that's not in a rulebook format in the box is innovative and new. I disagree. I think there are some real benefits to this system, but is it innovative just because some of the tools GMs have been using for years are now included and addressed in the core system? Nope, just handy.
This is getting negative comments over at strike or stun as people seem to think it's just a piece of flash for something they wanted to create on their own paper. I disagree however. This is a very useful tool in crafting a campaign. It has stability and agenda. A game master creats a NPC and their goals, finds a card that fits, generates the NPCs goals, outlining a campaign, then he makes a reverse list of goals for the heroes to stop the NPC or villian organization. Then this card tracks the progress through the story arc giving penalties to the NPCs when the heroes do go and giving bonues to the NPCs when the heroes fail and the NPC accomplishes his goals.Not to mention handpicking some talents to be attached to the card.
I never understand how people can make a judgment based on a single piece of paper without knowing all the surrounding trappings with which to make an informed decision.
Oh wait, they're gamers...
LeBlanc13 said:
Lautrer said:
I assume... I hope, that there are more rules, otherwise it's really just a party sheet for the baddies with flashy design. Hmm...
There's a lot of flashy in WFRP3 and I'm still waiting for the substance to show up.
Lots of people disagree with me, but that's just how I feel. I don't see the massive innovations that everyone is talking about. It seems like smoke and mirrors more than anything else. Adding rules to cards that could have easily been in a rulebook is not innovative. Placing careers on cards instead of in rulebooks (same thing.) The dice have some promise to them, but I don't think the rules go into enough detail to really explain how the mechanic works and how you really gain anything at all from adding one or two misfortune dice or challenge dice to the game.
I asked questions about how the impacts of adding a misfortune die or extra challenge die could impact the rolls in the game and got told multiple times that I just needed to play a couple of times to see how it worked. That doesn't work for me. I'd like to know my chances of accomplishing something before I attempt it when I play a game. It helps me to weigh my options. If I'm playing DH, I know that I roll a 53 or less on the percentile dice and I hit with my hellpistol. In WFRP3 it's not clear at all. If I'm rolling 3 blue dice, 2 red dice, 1 white dice, 1 black dice, 1 yellow dice and 2 purple dice, what are my chances of success? Not so simple is it?
I do hope that when they publish more materials that the meat of the game starts to show through.
Right now, I'm completely not impressed.
ragnar63 said:
Unfortunately, having played it more than a few times now, unless you are prepared to play a few games, it is difficult to explain the fun of the dice pool and its probabilities and complexities. Unless you are prepared to try a game, I suggest you stick to V2 and the percentile dice. The uncertainty even with a dice pool loaded in your favour or against you, makes it a lot more fun and unpredictable.
Thanks Ragnar. I appreciate that. I'm coming to the conclusion that my issues with the core mechanic will be the anchor around my neck keeping me from enjoying this game. I really do need to know my chances before I attempt something. Having a vague impression of what could occur doesn't work for me.
I enjoy the liberating feeling it gives. My players have commented more than once that it frees them up more for roleplaying and less 'minmaxing' like they and other play groups I have run used to feel obliged to do with other RPGs (namely, 3.5). They feel its more realistic in some ways that they know they have a 'decent' chance of succeeding in something based on the number of their dice vs. challenge/misfortune dice rather than gaming their way through the statistical models of what if they brace, use a block wall instead of nearby barrels for cover because it increases the modifier and so forth.
Is min/maxing bad?
I real life, don't you try to be the best you can be in the areas where it matters to you?
What all of a sudden makes that bad when you assign stats to it?
Anyway, my group min/maxes and has no issues roleplaying with their min/maxed characters.
The two things are not exclusive of each other.
LeBlanc13 said:
Is min/maxing bad?
I real life, don't you try to be the best you can be in the areas where it matters to you?
What all of a sudden makes that bad when you assign stats to it?
Anyway, my group min/maxes and has no issues roleplaying with their min/maxed characters.
The two things are not exclusive of each other.
Focusing on min/max often leads to less roleplaying. I'm not saying min/max means the opposite of roleplaying. What I mean is systems that spend a great deal of time with rules concerning min/max lead to players spending a great time dealing with min/max. Sure you can roleplay "around it" or on top of it but ultimately it's less work to roleplaying with systems that don't spend pages and pages and tons of rules on character optimizations.
This.
I guess where you're seeing 'vague' I'm seeing 'freeing'.
Nothing wrong with min/maxing, I do it with miniatures games all the time. 
keltheos said:
I enjoy the liberating feeling it gives. My players have commented more than once that it frees them up more for roleplaying and less 'minmaxing' like they and other play groups I have run used to feel obliged to do with other RPGs (namely, 3.5). They feel its more realistic in some ways that they know they have a 'decent' chance of succeeding in something based on the number of their dice vs. challenge/misfortune dice rather than gaming their way through the statistical models of what if they brace, use a block wall instead of nearby barrels for cover because it increases the modifier and so forth.
I like the fact that the GM says it's raining add misforune, the barrels the give you cover, adding a misfortune to the monsters, your idea to flank was great, take a fortune die." All these things that often spelled out at numerical modifiers are now reduced to just picking up a luck die and keeping the game moving.