This post is mostly directed at the FFG staff, Jay and cie.

I find that what the rulebook is cruelly missing are extensive examples of play.

We have tons of information on the Progress tracker (the GM toolkit even adds some), but very little regarding interpreting the dicepool (especially in non-combat situations).

The only example is a combat one, concerning a Goblin spearman, if I remember well. And none of these typical dice pool results even includes a Chaos Star. When the rules elaborate, it's only by giving precisions on using the dicepool with an action card in play.

We need multiple examples of dicepools for basic skill tests. Do boons and banes only result in fatigue or stress in that situation ? The RAW implies that, which is disappointing considering the potential of the dicepool system.

My point here is, could we have a PDF in the support section containing a good selection of in play examples of skill use, magic use, raw characteristic checks, combined actions (three people pushing a rock, for example), construction tests, to name but a few.

Examples are a great tool because they deliver an example of judgement calls the designer team would make in game as GMs. It doesn't add hard and fast rules that quickly become cluttered and impossible to remember, but it sheds more light on how the existing mechanic can be used to adjuticate a great variety of in game situations.

These examples will greatly help beginner GMs, but also will give experienced GMs clues as to what the designers had in mind in terms of "typical rulings".

Thanks !

I, too, felt that more examples would have greatly improved the rulebooks. I would be very grateful for an extended example of play. (I cannot tell you how many times I have reread the examples of play in my copies of White Box D&D and 1st Edition AD&D.) If I had to pick one, it would be an extended combat example with a sizeable party fighting against a complex group of bad guys. And not just one round, but all the way to the bitter end. (The recent example of a combat vs the world's bravest goblin was excellent, BTW.)

I think your suggestion that a group of examples could be placed in a PDF file is brilliant. Let me say that a bit louder, in case anyone is listening:

I THINK YOUR SUGGESTION THAT A GROUP OF EXAMPLES COULD BE PLACED IN A PDF FILE IS BRILLIANT!

I agree whole-heartedly. An example PDF would be immensely valuable.

i think the whole point was to let GMs have as much discretion as they want in interpreting dice pools, up to completely ignoring narrative possibilites and using it purely mechanically. how is anyone supposed to come up with a seemingly limitless number of examples on how to read a dice pool? what des fortune mean to you as a gm narratively? you just make it up. i understand the frustration of tangling with a certain person on striketostun but the guy is kind of silly and a little obsessive, a lot of striketostun people seem that way. just relax and enjoy your game. i think we can make our own examples without any "official" help.

I for one found that the few examples of the dice pools was far more then enough....Combat and Social encounters work the same as far as dice. You jsut dont use Attacks, you use Social abilities. The dice pools are simple, if your having problems with whats there then just ask about it, frankly i find it simple...and i come from a d20 background. I pick up on new things quickly though so dont think im calling anyone stupid

Here's why I want an example:

What does jay and crew do about some magic healer, healing the party right after a battle by just casting heals over and over and over?

When does jay give a rally step? It's rather confusing in the rulebook to say "It's a chance to catch your breath" which to me implies a short break, like after clearing a room in DnD, then in the glossary it says rally steps link acts, which can be, and often are, way more than just one encounter.

These things have a big impact on the game. Allowing people to heal too much changes the tone of the game from something dark and cthulhu-ish to something uber heroic like high fantasy DnD. I want to know EXCATLY when jay takes rally steps, if he gives bonus rally steps or not.

I'm also curious as to why some rather counter intuitive design schemes were implement. Like the delay and fatigue icons not adding up. At first I was adding all the delay and fatigue icons in a roll, I figured it was to punish someone who decided to create some form of super stance. If you only count one, there's never a reason not to go all the way into a stance.

Bindlespin said:

I think you're projecting a little on the original poster. Asking for some typical examples (which is what the original poster asked for) doesn't equate to a "seemingly limitless number of examples".

And I'm not trying to come down on you either, but step back for a second. The guy is asking for some help so he can better understand the game and have more fun with it. There's no harm in that, and either Jay and Co. have time to do it or they don't.. and they'll be the ones to best make that determination. There's nothing wrong in asking, they can only choose not do it.

I get your point that you don't the OP to stop thinking for themselves and use the developers as a crutch. That's fine and good. However it might be more intuitive for you than somebody else, and few more examples (not limitless numbers of them!) surely wouldn't hurt.

All of this predicated on whether they have the time to do that anyway.

Acts and rally steps are further defined in the GM Toolkit with examples. Both the demo and the adventure included with the game give additional examples of when to use rally steps. The game is flexible enough for the rally step to be after an encounter or after some other event. A rally step only allows one rally step action, it doesn't even allow for a maneuver and an action like a regular turn would. So it's impossible to heal and heal again during a rally step.

You're right though, healing is a sore point in this game, and it seriously requires some working out. Examples of how healing should take place would be very beneficial.

However, per a previous discussion on this board several of us came to the conclusion that healing should be limited to one attempt at healing a set of wounds, with no subsequent attempts allowed. So players can't spam heals. The Immediate Care and First Aid rules imply this or make it explicit in some cases. Spells are not directly included but the intent can be inferred. In the end, if you want a CoH type setting, just limit the amount of heals allowed.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how the Exertion and Delay symbols mechanic would benefit form an example. Exertion and Delay symbols do not accumulate because that would make going deep into a stance too dangerous. As it is it's fairly straightforward that the deeper you are in a stance the more likely you'll be getting delay or exertion symbols. Which is the design intent. Basically the probability of getting an exertion or delay symbol approaches 1 the further into a stance you are, and that's the cost of being deep into a stance. A penalty implies punishment for doing something, whereas 1 fatigue or 1 stress is a cost you can plan ahead for. All of a sudden getting 3 fatigues or 3 stresses would make play too schizophrenic.

There shouldn't be a punishment for having a character use his abilities, he's paid for his stances so why shouldn't he be allowed to be 3 deep into reckless without his character becoming unplayable? A 1:3 stance layout is common in several starting careers, and characters can purchase more of these as they advance in their career. Making delay and exertion symbols cumulative would make it foolish to invest in additional stances and gimp early starting characters with a 1:3 stance. It would also serve to undermine the stance mechanic. A bright wizard should be in his reckless stance, for example, it embodies who he is and how he acts.

Lexicanum said:

Well I just think it's more of a missed oppertunity with regard to delay and stress and fatigue. Its seems to me a system that would gave you multiples, would mean you would consider your stance and be fearful of being too reckless or cautious. RAW it does not need to be considered. I just happen to like the idea of a more interesting rewards and risk system with regard to conservative and reckless. I was just looking for some design insight to if that was ever contemplated. Seems more fun.

It's not that they haven't given you examples to illustrate interpreting dice.... They've just given you the freedom to interpret them in any way you choose as a GM.

I hope my sarcasm was detected since this is the answer I've been given to most of the issues I've found within the game.

Hope this helps you too!

i think the point of the OP has nothing to do with spamming heal or how to deal with rally points. it has to do with interpreting the dice pool, and fighting on another forum. the context is that on another forum there has been an ongoing and highly antagonistic thread (i am no saint, lost my cool on another thread here about two weeks ago, not proud but it happens) about one poster's (jude hornborg's? really? who cares?) obsessive preference with adding and subtracting in increments of ten from a d100 roll for task resolution. it is borderline nutty. maybe i am projecting, don't know not a psychologist. (displacing anger onto an unrelated target?) and watcher, i agree that examples are good, fine and often helpful, even for an arrogant but seemingly highly intuitive guy like me. i just hate the reason and the way they are being asked for. it is like the op is trying to drag the game designers into a fight, asking them to do something completely unprofessional. why would anybody submit to that? if you want to demand an official reply just to fight with someone on another thread i think that is silly. otoh, i kind of sympathize because that other thread is extremely lame. i don't know why anyone who likes wfrp3rd would ever post on a strike to stun forum; it is completely masochistic behaviour;)

examples are good. but there will never be an example that will stop trolls from trolling. red roses are red. trolls troll. i am not usually level-headed or even-tempered, but i think fighting on the wfrp3rd forum on strike to stun is not worth anyone's time. at least if you get in an arument here you are probably arguing with someone who has played and likes the game. not trying to offend. maybe in the future things will calm down over there, but right now it is just too silly.

Bindlespin said:

Hello, Kaptain O.

If that is the case, that this is some fallout from another board, then I withdraw my remark. I'm fairly new to Warhammer and this is the only site I frequent related to it.

Watcher said:

It's not really fallout. Jericho is a veteran WFRP forumite who participated in the aforementioned discussion without the acrimony that seems to follow this newcomer bindlespin around the internet. Jericho has been around long enough to decide for himself whether additional examples would be worthwhile - nobody told him what to think.

Watcher said:

It is not fallout at all: Jericho and Herr Arnulfe have been participating in a pretty wide ranging and informative discussion.

There does seem to be one poster that seems to like stiring the pot and creating dischord where ever he posts though.

Where is this happening at? Is there another good forum for WFRPG besides here on FF's website?

Okay.. I'm sort of baffled by it all. Bindlespin seems to be finding fault with Jericho for "demanding" examples to fight off a troll. But then other poster say he is not.

I don't know. I don't care. Part of me is sorry I said anything. Just to be clear I'm not siding against Jericho and actually I'm quite sympathetic to his request. I see no harm in asking for more examples. The Developers will either do it or they won't and that will be that. I got involved in this because Bindlespin seemed to be saying, "Hey don't ask for that, you don't need it." That didn't make me angry, but my own reaction was; "Let the fellow ask for whatever he wants."

In any case I am not making any negative assumption about Jericho's character and I support his desire to have more examples. If only because this is a new RPG to me, and narrative play comes easier to me so extra help with mechanics is always appreciated. The comment about "think for himself" might easily be misunderstood. What I was actually trying to do was put bindlespin's remarks in a positive light; i.e. "bindlespin must want to encourage Jericho to think for himself, otherwise why else would he try to suppress a request for help from the Developers?" Without that assumption, my default assumption would be that bindlespin is behaving poorly, so I was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt.

As for Strike-To-Stun... After all of this, I actually went over to their forums for the first time. Yeah. I am going to refrain from further comment.

dbresson said:

They're referring to Strike-To-Stun.net

Warning: Its heavily slanted towards 1st and 2nd Edition, and the native are angry about 3rd edition. There is a dedicated 3rd Edition Section, but it is unmoderated. Normally I think unmoderated is good, but I'm not so sure in this case.. This is purely my subjective opinion based upon one visit: I think you'll find some people valiantly trying to talk to about 3rd edition in a constructive and positive manner, but there is a troll standing by for each such individual.

If you like 3rd edition, or want to feel good about being interested in it, or want to feel good about buying it - you might want to avoid it unless you're particularly resiliant.

If you want to be talked out of 3rd edition, I think they're ready to help..

I note that they do have some good resources available from previous editions.

Watcher said:

StS isn't a "feelgood" site; it's for critical discussion of all things Warhammer. That said, its posters are among the most passionate and dedicated fans of WFRP. Fly-by-night fanboys sometimes visit StS for grognard-baiting cred, but they fade away eventually.

Herr Arnulfe said:

By all means, have at it. I'm well aware that I am not a dedicated or passionate fan of all things Warhammer. I'm a new guy. I bought the core game and the Adventurer's Toolkit and I hope to have fun with it. Maybe one day I will become a dedicated and passionate fan. However if I had to rely on StS for support or discussion, that probably wouldn't happen.

Since StS isn't designed with me in mind, I'll spare everyone the drama by steering clear until I'm thoroughly "dedicated and passionate". Or I'll fade away.

Watcher said:

StS wasn't designed as such, it's just evolved that way because of WFRP's history as a largely fan-driven game. The arguments around WFRP v2 six years ago were just as heated, if not moreso (and now 60%+ of StS posters are playing it).

Herr Arnulfe said:

Well, I regret the sarcasm. The point remains however; it serves a particular community, and that is not a bad thing at all. However, as a new person coming in, it wouldn't serve me as well. I don't resent that, but I do see it as realistic.

Watcher said:

Fair enough. If you stick with WFRP you'll probably warm up to StS eventually.

Herr Arnulfe said:

acrimony? it is following me everywhere I go on the internet? does it have a knife? just relax, pal. roll some percentage dice, subtract twenty and take a deep breath.

i'm sticking to thread and forums where people are enjoying wfrp3ed, trying to help each other, and peer reviewing adventure ideas. i call them acrimony- free zones.

Bindlespin said:

I noticed you were warned for personal attacks after just your 3rd post over at RPGnet.