Ok i have the edition have played it many times am a fan.....

However my issues

1. Not complete.....The game is expensive when you think what you need to play... And its not complete at first i thought ok...But now it really irritates me...

2.Can't cope with more than four players even with a large table its chit and card heavy.

3.Many cards just seem pointless almost as if it's the worst thing you can do or would want to...

4.The release schedule is bugging me...When will it be complete ?

5.I am having serious issues with it in game play as there are not enough advanced options and my players are finding this restrictive.

6.The game is not convention friendly...

7.The dice mechanic is ok however it's not that tell's a story...In my view

Now before i get shot i must stress i have massively rated this game so far but im now beggining to worry about how expensive and limited in some ways things have become...

Am i alone in these thoughts

Regards

boggle said:

I've read and looked at some of your (over)enthusiastic reviews . It's only natural that you're finding some limitations to the game after playing for a while. I'll give you some comments on your thoughts, but take it for what it is, just my own opinions.

1. How is it not complete? I've heard this from others, but I still don't get most of those complaints. Is it the high rank stuff (in which case I understand)? If you're one of those that think the advanced careers are missing, I'll point out that 3e is not 2e. From what we have seen so far there's nothing inherently more powerful with advanced careers than basic ones. If you think it's not complete because it lacks rules for horses, ships, artillery etc. I just think you'll have to wait for it or make the rules up yourself, no RPG contains rules for everything.

2. On that I agree. We're only 3 players and that works fine. But I can guess it becomes an utter mess when you're 4+ players. I'd suggest cutting down on a lot of the tokens for pen and paper tracking. Fatigue, stress and wounds can all easily be tracked with a pen and paper (in fact, there are char sheets around with that). But I think all RPGs suffer when you're more than 4 players (all that I've played have in any case).

3. I don't agree. Many cards might not be mechanically the best. But the game is not a tactical wargame. You should actions based on your character concept, not based on the damage output. Even if a card is mechanically bad it might make perfect sense for someone to buy it because it enhances their roleplaying experience.

4. When it's done . What's the hurry? Make your own rules if you need something urgently (see 1.)

5. I'm not sure I get what you mean. Are you talking about advanced options in battle? I'm not sure WHFRP3e is the right game if your players want a tactical combat simulator, the game is more narrative than gamist. For me the options that exist are enough. And it grows more and more complicated when me and the rest of the group gets more actions/talents. Also, for the players to really have to use advanced options and planning the GM has to challenge them with hard and varied encounters.

Or are you talking about options in character advancements? WHFRP3e certainly has a lot less of that than 4e/Pathfinder. But that's not a bad thing in my opinion. But if your players want more of that I think you'll have to wait for further supplements. There's bound to come out more advanced stuff later (Winds of magic being the first example).

6. Personally, I couldn't care less. So I can't really comment on that

7. How would the dice tell a story? Of course they don't, that's up to the GM and players to do. The dice help tell a story. And they do it a lot better than a d20 does.

thanks for your thoughts....

What i have said for us are the issues so far..

boggle said:

1. I agree the lack of completion is an issue, but the expansions are coming as the magic set comes out soon and I imagine an advanced career/more career box is due out as well. Honestly though to be able to help you with this issue, some more info on this "complaint" would be necessary. If it is the lack of advanced careers and switching careers is not an option, then just brew up the fact player's can repeat career's after completing them. Ultimately, it just gives them more dice, more actions, more talents, more wounds, etc. which is the same as switching to a new career. Honestly, an advanced Hunter would/will pretty much look like a Hunter. If they hadn't insisted on no repeat careers in the rules and allowed for career repetition, a lot of the "lack of completion" argument would not be there. The only thing the system is short is a well-rounded magic system, but they do give you three very core magic users in the system and well as three core priests. The spells are flexible and well designed enough that they cover all the basic areas players go after anyway. Damage, heal and buffs. Sure Damage with lightning is different than damage with fire, but in the end, the effect remains the same...damage, the descriptor is all that changes. So if you want a Wizard to cast lightning, buff, or heal, just mix up the cards in a way to suit your needs and know that in these cases these spells do x. Sure, their are tons of spells that could be there (and they will be soon) but it does work just fine with a few minor tweaks. I agree that it is pricier than standard RPG'S, but you don't need the toolkit, you also don't need gathering storm and you really don't need the adventurer's toolkit either. So far, it's a 100 buck core. If you were playing another game and bought the core and wanted a screen you would still have to pay for that screen. I know the screen here is more, but at least we get more cards, more tools, more bits to use with the screen than in traditional RPG'S which like to sell a screen with like a pad of character sheets and/or some useless sets of tables.

Also remember, traditional RPG publications make you pay, in their cores for tons of mechanics you may never use in their core. A lot of groups don't run with Wizards, Priests, etc. yet you still have to shell out the cash for those pages, regardless if you want them or not. I know here we have to pay for them as an expansion, but that gives people the option to get them or not and if there group isn't magic heavy, then forget it.

Another thing about the price, so far, I've bought everything. I use everything and I find each expansion are not worthless, they actually add to the game unlike most RPG'S that may have a list of lets say five feats or 10 new powers in a 20-25 dollar suppliment that will be used and the rest is pure fluff. I find here, I get practicality for my buck and since the expansions are useful, we feel driven to buy them, we feel like we have to have them when we really don't.

The only other reason I think people feel the set is incomplete is a failure of the designers to realize how fast people actually level. The one advancement is a cute idea, but not practical to long term play. To slow down the game, we do five xp equal 1 advancement. Skills cost 3 advancements (2 for career skills) specializations cost 1 and talents 2 and actions 2. My players have yet to complain about running out of stuff. Sometimes though, I do wonder if this game is designed for character's to have shorter "shelf lives" than in other RPG's, meaning you play for 1-7 months, then retire the character and either switch to a different game or generate new ones. Just a thought.

2. I totally disagree with you here. We play on a 3 1/2 feet by 5 foot table and we seat five people around the table with the me (the GM) on the long side and my players (except for one) are not skinny by any stretch. We also use more cards than traditionally because we put our skills on cards as well. We use the full expanse of chits, dice, and action cards with an expanded spell set (for home brew high magic) and no one runs out of space...ever. We also do this off one core with 6 dice expansions and have no problem or a shortage of dice. The one thing we eliminated is player's don't sit around with their career cards. We simply tap the two talents they have active and untap them when they switch out. Works fine for us. Chit storage can be broken down into communal piles (as some do) or they don't take more chits for fatigue and stress then they can have and actually stack them up. Wounds they don't lay out individually, they stack them so we can quickly see the number of wounds, but are otherwise piled. Some player's keep their action cards in a stack and draw the one they will use. This is not a matter of space shortage, it's a matter of how they want them to be. Keeping stuff well organized helps save tons of space.

3. Some Action cards are just bad (dramatic flourish) while others are too good (double strike). But RPG'S are constantly plagued by powers that are way more powerful than others. However, the number of useless cards are far less than the useful ones and cards like double strike or easily cut or given a higher recharge rating. It's not an epidemic problem, it's only a few that really stick out. I believe some of the design is this is a cool idea rather than this is a balanced idea and I sort of like that, it's just a matter of how it gets used. Thanks to Online gaming and DND, RPG games have nose dived (for the worst) for balance over narrative or neat ideas. If the balance is a problem, cut those useless cards.

4. Who knows and will it ever and what do you mean? Complete will be someday...if you want every geographical location mapped and with an expansion, that's going to be a while...if you want all the career options...I imagine we'll get Dwarf careers with Dwarf expansions and Empire Careers with Empire expansions as well as careers in character expansions. So will we ever get all careers at once? No, I imagine not. But then again, doesn't that make getting suppliments worth it in the end? I'd say so. And about the price, every consumer will spend money on something...so it's either 30 bucks for this game or 30 bucks for other games. It's all relative...either way, I can promise anyone, you'll waste money on something. Everybody does.

5. I don't know what Advanced options you are looking for. The cards advance themselves. The more dice you have, the more boons generated so therefore a card that generates one critical on 2 boons can be activated now when the player rolls 4, 6, 8. So instead of dropping just one critical they can up to four criticals or more in a single hit. That is an "advanced" option because low character's simply can't do that and generate enough successes to succeed at an action.

6. I have no idea what you mean here or why it's even relevant and why you think it isn't convention friendly. The rules are explained on cards, the dice explain themselves, character's take no time to generate and there is no need for book checking. This game is more convention friendly than MOST RPG'S.

7. I simply say this is not the fault of the dice, it's the fault on how you use them. Boons and Banes can always generate new narrative possibilities if you let them. You jump across a cliff, you succeed with a bane. Maybe you grab onto the cliff edge, now must make a strength check to pull yourself up. You fail and fall, but with some boons. Now you end up somewhere else, but not a bad somewhere else or somewhere in reaching distance. Try on you try to throw the sacred idol the cultists need to finish a ritual. You throw it to a friend. You succeed at the check, but generate banes. The idol drops. A cultist picks it up and runs off with it. Story changed. From my last week's game, my group needed to break into a fortress to rescue a few people. They check the door see a guard outside and pull him in. They bind him up and one character sets to work interrogating him with a blade at his throat. He tells him, "where are they holding them and tell us what kind of opposition will be along the way?" I make him make an intimidate check and he generates 2 comets, 3 boons, and two successes. I could just ignore all that wonderful juice and give him something limp and say he tells you everything, but I figured the roll needed something more given the amount of positives generated. So I made this guy be an infiltrating spy who works for the same organization as the player and helps them not only rescue their friends, but continues to be their ally and is now helping them. The thought never even crossed my mind of a spy inside the organization until those dice dropped. The dice has changed the story dramatically for us ever since. My point is, it depends how much you use the dice to create story or not. Sure, if you just use them for damage mitigation and activating card effects, you're right, they don't add anything. If you make them add narrative effects, then the sky is the limit. You just can't think of dice linearly as they were in other games (nor your story for that matter) and let the boons/banes translate into interesting and unique effects. A player can always choose some type of narrative effect off of boons and banes instead of critical hits etc. You simply have to encourage it and reward them for it. Last, on this topic, letting the other players contribute to the decision of what they mean not only speeds things along but allows them to contribute directly to the story (of course, with your power of veto still applying).

What fascinates me about this post is it seems we get one of these a week or so on these boards, always at the top. It also seems they have the same list of complaints. Heck, the boards just got hit with one a few posts down about some guy quitting over many of these same complaints (with a few new ones added). It makes me wonder if this isn't some form of competitor sabotage or a group of disgruntled 2e players coming over here trying to destroy 3e...these boards had that problem before publication and people who claimed they would stop at nothing to destroy 3e. This post Boggles my mind more than most because these aren't even asking for questions, it's just straight up facts of "why I hate this game." Oh sorry, supposedly likes it though tears down everything about it...which is the normal dialogue for people who like something of course.

See, it makes sense this kind of trolling (funded by competitors or otherwise) as follows:

1) Player posts a perfectly normally title, one to draw us in..."my thoughts after play testing." Which makes you believe there will be some kind of constructive dialogue, good observations, but most of the time you find the same list of complaints.

2) Fake disgruntled post draws an emotional reaction. We reply. This gives not only free bumps to the post as the community replies, but we also give the "assassin" the ability to reply to what we say, yielding more bumps.

2) These bumps outshine constructive dialogue and muddles up the top threads with negative criticism.

3) A person thinking about buying the product checks the public forums. The public forums only have, what seems, to be a series of hate-posts about the game. New gamer quits or old gamers, swept up in the fury stop buying expansions. This hurts the game and drives down sales.

4) Sabotage successful.

Of course, there is no way to trace or prove this theory, but maybe we should just stop replying to these posts and let them be buried like the dinosaurs they are unless the player actually gives positive and negative criticism and actually proves they've played it on some level. This guy has a mysterious group (as they all do) who are always frustrated about the same points that people always say they're frustrated about. Nothing new, maybe as a community it's just time to move on from coddling these people...because they never ask for criticism to their comments and ignore it when you give it to them (as is highlighted in Boggles recent reply - "thanks for your thoughts...What I have said for us are the issues so far...") that's it regardless of what other people said or reply, he's not interested in a dialogue obviously. So why support this carefully designed complaint any further than he's entertaining the replies himself.

sorry mate replies like this make me want to sell the lot..

I have been very supportive of third edition...

I am not having a go i am pointing out my issues so far based on my play experience.

Also this is what the other players are saying.

I did not like 2nd edition warhammer im not here to be some sort of assassin.

I was interested in finding out others views....

Clearly there are some that just want to snipe i say good luck to you but that's disappointing .

regards

sean.

boggle said:

I agree with Commoner. If you dont like the game sell the lot because someone will find the game way more interesting. Good day.

commoner said:

Just to clarify - What you're proposing might make a good house rule, but it kinda sounded like you were saying it's the way the main rules work.

Per the rules, each boon line can only be used once. If you disregard that rule, you'll definitely change the relative power level of certain cards. Some actions have their best effects in the success lines, others in the boons, and still others in the comets. All of them, however, assume you can only use any given line just once (and only use one of the success lines). If you roll three or more comets, one can be a critical, one can access the comet line of the action card (if it has one), and the rest get turned into success or boons.

I agree with some of Boggle's criticisms, especially point 2 and 5. Our group is enjoying the game but the jury is still out whether it is going to be a long term fixture for us.

That his legitimate criticisms have been met with such absurd notions about an organised campaign of sabotage is ridiculous and do these boards no favours.

commoner said:

commoner said:

I believe you're misrepresenting me here Boggle. If you look at the quoted section above which I posted I think I did state a different point of view than yours...and if you actually read all the above posted information I think you'll see that this statement is absolutely false:

"Clearly there are some that just want to snipe i say good luck to you but that's disappointing." - sean aka Boggle.

I didn't. I replied to your post. I gave you feedback otherwise. Sell the whole lot? Were you already planning on quitting? Sounds like it because I don't see how my completely harmless (if you are as you represent yourself) could possibly turn your stomach so much that you'd say to yourself, "there's a guy on the internet who I don't even know, probably lives in a different country, who suggested I may be some type of hyper-troll because I am not engaging in a dialogue or adding anything new to the dialogue about these topics has just killed my enjoyment completely?" Doesn't make sense, especially if you're in the middle of a game, story, or whatever you call it with WFRP and you and your group are enjoying it and having some issues, but not a whole lot. I don't follow the logic. I mean, in short, it's like you coming on to a cooking forum and saying, I don't like nuts in my cookies. Then I say, I can't believe you don't like nuts...I don't have a problem, are you allergic or had a bad experience with them, maybe choked and then you saying, I'm never going to eat another cookie again in my life.

@ r_b_bergstrom:

You are absolutely correct. The confusion in my reply comes from the fact we have our weapon cards printed on cards and we have since the beginning (we put them on Arkham style cards before the set came out as it was a complaint to us they weren't on cards.). So what I meant by an action card was a weapon's CR rating. Our interpretation of the CR rule: "a weapon's critical rating indicates the number of boons required to convert a wound inflicted by this weapon into a critical wound." means it can be done multiple times. I know this seems like a contradiction to the only one Boon effect may be triggered, but that is implicitly stated in the Boon effect on Action Cards section and not repeated in the weapon section, nor is the CR rating measured as a Boon effect, it is an effect onto itself in its own category the CR rating. Feel free though, to correct me if I'm wrong, it's just our interpretation. Ultimately, in a way this comes down to the fact we don't interpret CR to be a success line, but an entity onto itself.

I do agree with you it may make a good house rule, but it may stretch some cards too far (***** in the Armor comes to mind).

@ Replicant253:

I did comment legitimately about his criticisms and did reply to them and even agreed about some of his points. As to my final comment, okay, right...and we can all take everything in this world so seriously. Don't you think when you're typing the words "absurd notion" it is as it sounds, absurd? You think I actually believe this is sabotage? Really? Did I not put up enough emoticons or something to signify it's really not serious? But these list of complaints are all over this board with so many people replying to them everywhere...my point is, as I outline in my previous reply, why on earth start a new thread and when we reply, why don't you people who have issues with the game ever comment on the counter points to your criticism when we, who rise to defend it, take our time? And again Replicant are you really interested in a dialogue or just sounding off: I don't like this. I don't like it. Why? No response. Yeah that's constructive dialogue. And the insistence of people who don't like aspects of the game continuously spamming new threads concerning these same 5-7 points could potentially do more damage than they're worth without that dialogue (intentionally or unintentionally).

Of course as all of these threads go, the people who don't like the game play the role of victims against the fascist overlords who actually defend it's shortcomings and strengths and want to engage in actual dialogue while those who don't like aspects rise up in their glorious, "I'm going to quit this game or the this is ridiculous," or whatever. Maybe I was here when the 2e players went ballistic and you weren't I don't know, but this kind of spamming was all over these boards and still is.

Honestly, if the game doesn't work for you, modify it slightly. I'm sure you do it with other RPG'S. There are threads on here to reduce the dependency on counters, on cards, use card sleeves and a wet erase marker to mark off the number of times you use an action. Leveling too fast, slow it down. Not enough advanced options? Repeat careers. There really aren't advanced monsters either. Want to do more damage, add rank to the damage inflicted. These take all of about 5 minutes to create and use. The list of complaints are just that, complaints and the complainers seem less interested in adjusting the game to their group's needs (as happens with every RPG) and more focused on just complaining here.

To explain what I mean, instead of a post like this, why not instead approach it with, lets look at point 2:

A post that's titled, "we are having problems with the game. Help?" And then, let me look at point 2,

Point 2: We are having issues with table space, any suggestions on solutions?

Point 5: We don't have advanced options and we need some (explain why) Any suggestions?

That would seem way less like complaining just to complain and more like someone actually interested in the game, this community, and actual dialogue rather than just having some place to hear you complain without any care what we have to say on the matter.

First, I do love this game.

But I recognized that there were key components that were missing when I first got it. I don't feel that this is a ploy or anything on FFG's behalf. They are a company. Companies need to make money. A game like this can have a LOT of potential expansions.

And as such, some campaigns will struggle with things like Advancements because the campaign will outstrip the releases. Therefore, despite my excitement over this game, I decided that I would not run a campaign. Yet. I need the Magic book to come out first, before I can run the campaign that I want to run (it's going to a be a Wizard heavy game). I would in fact prefer for a Chaos supplement to also come out as well, but we'll see.

But I do here you, OP. I think that the fundamentals of this game are absolutely solid and fantastic. I love the dice mechanics, despite how complicated it can get to build dice pools.

Anyway, I can only offer a bit of advice here:

Space - I highly recommend doing away with a bunch of the tokens. Grab some of those cards sheets that allow players to mark things like Fatigue, Stress, Wounds, Stance track and stuff. Somebody posted some excellent character sheets that you can use to track all of that stuff. Use cards for Criticals, Madness, etc.

Story telling dice - They have a section in the GM's guide for what they mean how the dice telling the story, but I ignored that personally. I mean if a player wants to assess their dice and determine that how they accomplished something can be translated through the dice, so be it.

For me, however, what the dice so is give the GM permission, through Boons, Banes, Comets and Chaos stars, to add up various effects that they feel would add to the story. There are obvious effects, like when a player on a bridge rolls 1 Bane, the GM is free to interpret this as, 'character slips and partly falls of the bridge, but manages to catch themselves (they have to pull themselves up in the next round)'. 2 Banes could be that they tumble off the bridge entirely.

But there are so many times when I, as a GM, want to make the scene more exciting, visceral and visual by adding some sort of flavor-text to it. Now I have a mechanic that allows me to add some effect to that flavor text. When fighting a Troll, for example, who gets some extra Boons, hey, you Mr. PC are now knocked on your ass, or go sailing through the nearby barn or whatever.

Anyway, that's my $0.02. Please feel free to ignore people who give you worthless advice of selling your game. You can either stick with it or ask your players to give the game a pause for a while until they come out with some expansions.

thanks rune good advice i will ....

commoner said:

I see what you're saying, and from reading just the rulebook, it would look like you're right. However, the FAQ clarifies that it doesn't work that way. From page 8 of the FAQ:

A weapon’s critical effect can only be triggered one per attack using
Sigmar’s Comet results. A weapon’s critical rating can only be
triggered once per attack using boons . Other sources of critical
damage effects (such as an action card, talent, or magic effect) can
each contribute their own critical damage results if the triggering
requirements are satisfied.

boggle said:

Finally, the Troll Boss came around, delivering snap judgment, calling married people with respectable jobs things like: "All red faced with tears and snot bubbles cause he doesn't have a life (or girlfriend for that matter)."

Very classy, sir, very classy. Comments like this really do say a lot about the person who posted them and the value of their opinion on any mater.

I may not agree with Commoner that this is all intentional sabotage (sorry mate, people are just that simple - they write so someone would validate their opinion... makes them look smart in their own eyes I guess), but I do agree that we should stop fuelling these insane threads. For me, this is my last reply to a rant tread (as always, disguised either as a fair discussion or as a call for help). I urge all sane people to do the same - let's not feed the trolls!!

For them the $60 WFRP3 core price tag will always be more than the first three $20 books of D&D, and the four $20 WFRP3 supplements will always somehow add up to more than another ten $20 books for D&D.

Have a wonderful day ... and beware the Troll Vomit!!

"All red faced with tears and snot bubbles cause he doesn't have a life (or girlfriend for that matter)."

That is insulting, so I reported your words to the moderator. I understand you are disappointed because that game doesn't feel the way you expected, but that's no reason to behave like that. Be constructive, propose your way to play it as others do (no chits, less cards...) and please be mindful of your words.

FFG's forum is a place of common sense where I enjoy to discuss with reasonable people who know what Respect means. I expect to keep it that way.

Good game.

by the way : I'm 30, married, got a good job, friends, social activities and I even practice regular sport competition.

LOL

here we go again.

Actually Boggle has a point, (and many bad ones). But reporting this to a moderator? c`mon his not insulting individuals, just insulting in general. Don`t give him credit by doing so.

we are not even close to...what do they call it? flamewars? (or something like that)

I love this edition but I don`t feel wounded by his critics simply because I am not one of those who attack any who disagree with me or hate whfrp. People are entitled to their opinions. even if they are ridiculous.

Again I find this amusing.

My opinion after being on these boards from inception of the WFRP3e system is that any negative point of view is stymied by someone offering ways to patch the system or refute the fact that the game is not the greatest game in the world.

Anyone that dares to criticize the game is called an assassin, a paid saboteur from competitors, a troll, a 2nd Edition hold over, etc...

Isn't it possible that people may not like this game after trying it? They don't have to be a 2nd edition carry overs to not like this edition. I started playing 2nd Edition WFRP only after purchasing this edition. Prior to that, I was playing D&D and Dark Heresy. WFRP 3e seems to be made to bridge the barrier from board games to RPGs. Anyone familiar with Descent, also made by FFG, will see the similarities inherent in both games. There is nothing wrong with it and this is still an RPG despite the tools incorporated from other FFG board games.

If you try this game and don't like it, I think you have as much right to express your opinion on these forums as a person that loves the game.

Frankly, the condescension and name calling tactics did not come into play until COMMONER opened up his mouth and started being rude.

I think respect from both sides is needed to keep threads productive.

Anyway, that's just my two cents. Take if for what you will.

I totally disagree with Magnus and disagree at some points with boggle. I think the game is to young to be judged from a "I want all things in it" perspective. In my young days we played WFRP with nothing more than core book for years (even more: four years) , so I believe I can wait before saying "Incomplete".

And BTW I bought the game new from the shop for an equivalent of 70 dollars, so the price argument is IMO cow crap.

D.

LeBlanc13 said:

hypocrisy. i think the op could have just said, "at first i really liked this game and then I found out during play that i want something more tactically complex". then other tactical/simulationist players could have said, "yeah, we feel you buddy. so we made a bunch of house rules." the end. i completely sympathize with commoner. when he "opened up his mouth" he didn't call anyone names. he was just listing some things that are irritating. @LeBlanc13: just like you did.

Bindlespin said:

Thank you for understanding my point here. I did not actually call anyone names, nor was I rude to anyone. If you read my second post, you will find a deep level of clarification I feel absolutely no reason to repost. If the manner of approach wasn't simply a list of complaints by the OP and the desire for a constructive dialogue was sought from the OP then I would have joined in. I have criticisms of this system as well...I do not think it is the "best system ever." I think it is a very good system however. You can also see my point in this specific context as the OP has yet to actually engage us in a dialogue or respond to our replies or our possible solutions and has disappeared. As I said would happen.

commoner said:

We'll agree to disagree then.

As far as name-calling, perhaps you didn't come right out and call anyone specific names, but you do make many inferences.

As far as being rude, that is subjective. I found your responses to the OP to be very condescending and rude. You can't sway my opinion on that.... so don't try.

Frankly, if anything has pushed me further away from this game, it's some of the postings on this forum that respond to people having real concerns about this game.

Anyway, I am pretty much finished with this conversation and I'm sorry I decided to even try to express my thoughts.

Enjoy your game.

LeBlanc13 said:

a real concern is something like: "i have no idea how to stop my priest of shallya from heal spamming." not: "the game is not convention friendly... ". who buys games based on their convention friendliness? what is anybody supposed to do with a complaint about convention friendliness? are we supposed to go: "****, he has a real point there about conventions. this game sucks. i quit." really?

productive criticism of the game usually shows up in every forum but the main forum. i have never seen anyone give anybody hassle about how to deal with real concerns. in any case, nobody is calling out boggle. not really. commoner said "some of this stuff is getting old quick". he was clearly not calling for a moratorium on game criticism. and nobody is asking anyone "to stop expressing their opinions" but if some people actually do (perhaps out of a proper sense of shame) then i don't think anyone will mind.

let's everyone enjoy our game!

LeBlanc13 said:

Right, because I did respond to all seven of his responses in a very friendly, open manner. Am I rude in those seven responses because I disagree with him and your notions that this is a glorified board game? Or several of your other posts where you have criticized the game and made counter points against them? Did you even read my reply to his concerns or did you just jump to what you wanted to find, someone counter-pointing "hate listing."

Seriously? You are pushed away from this game just because someone disagrees with your point of view and we rise to defend it? That is what's driving you away from the game? Based on your list you seem to prefer Dark Heresy and Warhammer 2e because the systems are clones of each other and prefer those archaic systems. That's a preference and a fine preference, just one I do not share.

Again, you are also spending your time criticizing the nature of my criticism of criticism. Can you honestly admit this continual rag on the same seven points is not detrimental to the game in someway and not really constructive at all? The identical list we heard from 2e players before the system switch and we still here from other gamers who hate this game. Ever watch the parodies on YouTube of playing warhammer 3e cleverly disguised as "actual play"?

For a second, why don't you turn the tables. What if someone were to constantly explain how the old system has a high whiff factor, a very narrow scope (especially in dark heresy) career tree system in terms of how you can switch from career to career and if you want to, because the story justifies it, have to go back to a basic career to start upward again and in Dark Heresy you're locked in...forever. How dark Heresy's burst fire rules are sloppy in execution and other games due a much better job with bursts and if you want real gun fights play those games instead because Rogue Trader's is just junk? How 2e is an either never hit or never miss system? How the critical hit mechanic is awkward and confusing to use? How skills in 2e are about useless? How i have to refer to a book to be able to find rules instead of them being posted on cards? How 2e seems more designed for couch-play than table play? How it won't hold up at conventions (without explanation)? How the layout of the character sheet is hard to find things on the sheet? How my players have burned holes through their character sheets erasing wound boxes that are constantly healing and being gained so I have to photocopy another character sheet, man I wished they used chits? How the books are disorganized and if I want a full list of magic in 2e I have to by an arcane handbook, each realm book and the core and that makes this game really expensive over a fifty dollar box set that has all of it in it? If I want a complete career list I have to buy each expansion book because they keep adding powers and careers in each expansion? Of how 2e is incomplete because they NEVER published books for Dwarves and Elves, but they published one for Skaven when my campaign doesn't use Skaven? How the leveling in those systems are too limiting because once you hit about 85% there is no point in leveling because you almost never fail or miss and because of the limits of percentile dice Elves can never hold up on the mechanic?

What if a group continuously posted this over and over again? Would you consider that really critical, or just trolling, spamming etc? It's easy to point out flaws in things and just ***** about them. Pointing fingers at people when you exist in a narrow scope without turning the tables to look at it from a different side and see how this "hate listing" when applied to something you enjoy without any real constructive dialogue being pursued is just as bad as going to a pro-choice rally to spout off you're pro-life rhetoric. It is just as bad as wish listing on forums and generally get the same level of reaction. If an actual dialogue was being searched for I would support it and have numerous times in the past, concerning all these points, which I again responded to. But again those who criticize this game for the sake of criticism generally (not including you as I have read your posts) aren't interested in a dialogue, they are interested in complaints, nothing more and that's the part I can't tolerate and so pointed out in my reply, because, as I predicted to this day...Boggle has yet to reply to any real constructive response to the actual constructive feedback. Just a, these are our viewpoints. Bye.

That's what I have a problem with and that's what I responded to. Nothing against Boggle personally, I have read his other posts before and I found them to be useful...I am against the nature of this particular style of posting, as my sarcastic "conspiracy theory" definitely highlights. That's my point.

Thanks LeBlanc, I will enjoy my game. I hope you enjoy yours.

hi i been reading (or at least skimming) through all of Mangus the Pious previous posts. And you know the sad thing about it?

To me he seemed like a decent, likeable GM and rpger. He was enthusiastic about the game from the beginning. He contributed on many discussions, and even defended the new edition on several occasions. But than he started to have issues with the new game, and where real concerned about where the gaming is going. And btw I too have some concerns about this game. So at least he is not alone in that perspective.

But He was never negative (just concerned) until his last infamous post here on this thread. So no he didn`t deserve to be called troll, gognard or saboteur. He just lost it, maybe he didn`t feel that anyone did not see his angle or argument.

Maybe the REAL trolls here, are the ones who always feel compelled to dismantle any critisicm about this game, whatsoever, and don`t have insight to see that the game may be lacking, in terms of traditional roleplaying? or at least understand that other can feel so.

I am just asking, I would hate for this forum to become a fanboi forum, where all critisicm get smashed, even constructive critisism. A product doesn`t get better if no one complained about it, or if all it recieved was praise.

And Commoner I think you was out of line here. sorry mate, this wasn`t Magnus the Pious fault alone. You adviced about not answering such criticism, maybe an advice you should have followed yourself in this instance.

I too would have felt provoked have I been called a saboteur.

Just saying.

Iffo said:

Iffo had this right. let's let this thread die. it is clearly not helping anyone. there was nothing to learn and nothing to enjoy.