I just got my GM Toolkit and TGS campaign last night and while overall I love the products and can't wait to use them I have a couple minor gripes. First the packaging. It is flimsy and not at all what I was expecting after the core set and Adventurer's Toolkit. Especially with the amount of components that come in each box I would expect the sets to come in something that isn't going to fall apart quick, and top / bottom opening boxes like these make it much easier for components to fall out.

A bigger gripe is that art is already being recycled. Seriously with all the Warhammer Fantasy art out there why is art already being recycled in an edition that only has four products out so far? I don't have an issue with art from previous editions getting reused but to already be reusing art within a brand new edition just seems kinda lazy.

With that said the stuff in the boxes has me excited to play, the GM kit especially helped clerify a lot of minor questions I had on how to properly and effectively utilize the components without letting them become a distraction. The Gathering Storm seems like a solid group of four adventures that help showcase the system. Yes the maps could have been half sheet size at least instead of career sheet size but with the amount of table space the system already takes up I do not consider it an issue at all.

I have one minor recommendation for the layout of mmonster entries in future products. Currently there are usually three or more entries for a creature type (ie. Ungor, Gor Wargor) but only one image. For people like myself who are new to the Warhammer universe this makes it a bit harder to flavor the scene not knowing whats visually different between the creatures. I would recommend having at least a small image of each next to the entry and have that image match that of the punch board token of the monster.

Congzilla said:

I don't think they expect you to keep anything in the expansion boxes. I think the idea is that you add the components to the ones in the core set - so you keep all the location cards together etc. What they expect you to do after the corebox fills up I don't know.

Congzilla said:

I sort of agree with this point, although at the same time, I can understand why FFG doesn't want to reuse too much art from previous editions. They're trying for a unified look in all the art. The brilliant pencil art from 1st edition would probably look terribly out of place. My biggest issue with this unified look is that it's all indistinguishable greys and browns. Nothing stands out, it's hard to make out what you're looking at, and it doesn't have the character that the 1st edition pencil art had (except maybe if you lived in a cave and have never seen generic dark pompous-gritty art before).

The Gathering Storm has a few decent pieces though (although the goblins are a bit too fluorescent green a bit too far in the other direction). I like the hillbilly page, mostly.

Congzilla said:

Even better would be if FFG made the logical next step in their "everything on cards" approach and made cards for all NPCs and monsters. Nice picture to show the players on one side, and all the stats you need on the other side. It goes perfectly with FFG's "lots of fiddly bits and cards"-approach, and would be extremely useful.

Problem with stats on the back is it could be easy for players to see. I just want to at least know what the monster token I'm looking for even looks like. Between 4 sets I have two beastmen token types, no idea which monsters they are actually supposed to be, are they an Ungor, a Gor, or a Wargor. With how streamlined and component based they are making this game, having images in the book matching to the image on the monster token just seems to make much more sense.

And yes I know I can just say a whatever is supposed to be a whatever, and I don't mind doing that, it just seems with how linked everything is in this edition to the components that this would have been a no brainer.

Congzilla said:

Hmm...that's an interesting complaint. If you read carefully, you can usually work out which image is which. I'd post a list for you online, but they'd be upset that I copied their art to do it. You're right, thoughfor newcomers, a set that explains the images might be really useful. (They could, at least, mark the identity of the pieces on the board from which you punch out the pieces.) If you like, feel free to PM me with any questions and I'll help you out.

I love the art in this game. I love it that so much is full-color and high production value. I like the line art in the older versions of WFRP, but the layout of the books is godawfully unattractive and plain, and I hate B&W rulebooks. I do think they're reusing art just to be consistent; if they use the same beastmen in every edition, then it's (theoretically) easy to tell which pieces you're supposed to use.

Re: the boxes, on this I TOTALLY agree. The first two boxes (core set and ATK) were so beautifulwhy are the supplement boxes so junky? My Core Set box is already flled up because I bought decent plastic and metal boxes to protect my cards and punchout bits, so there's only so much junk from the new supplements that's likely to fit. Ultimately, I just went to Staples and bought a big plastic box for the extras, but it disappoints me that everything can't sit on my shelf and look unified. I like tidy, visually attractive shelves.

Congzilla said:

Not really an issue for me. I just want to show my players what the monster, or NPC more likely, looks like. They don't get to keep the card, I get to keep it, because I need the stats. But combining the stats and the face on a single card just makes it a very obvious piece for FFG to produce.

Congzilla said:

Whichever you like. Each beastman should be unique anyway, although I'd choose the biggest, baddest, most aggressive looking guy with the biggest horns as the biggest beastman.

During the demo I need 4 beastmen standups and I had only 1, so I had to use a wide variety of other creatures. I think FFG could have chosen a more practical mix of standups for the core set.

Here's my .02 on some of the components.

Since we already have halfsheet cards for character sheets/party sheets/nemesis sheets/etc why not do this with NPC/Monsters? I'd much prefer a half sheet with stats (and the appropriate special rules for the monsters) and the specific action cards (in a tighter format for space considerations) than them printed in the books as they currently are.

It is my single biggest frustration is that I have to have photocopied pages (which are incomplete due to the missing special rules and common action cards) or mickey mouse something of my own design. Universal Head's first pass on his excellent RP reference tools had each of the NPC/monster summaries from ToA on small standard cards (which even these would e easier to manage with the action cards) but had to pull them.

Something in between would be perfect allowing me to not eat up a mess of space at the table with the NPC details floating around. Its the only thing that really frustrates me as a GM. I don't want to balance the book, I don't want to have the space behind the screen cluttered with stat cards, but I do need a place I can reference my stuff easily.

In the demo adventure the other 3 are henchmen so they only need a single stand-up for the group, but the adventure included with the core set also needs multiple beastmen so ya they should have had another one or two in there.

And as i stated I don't have an issue switching them with different stand-ups, but that doesn't change the fact that I would still at least like to know which one is supposed to be what. Having cards for the monsters with stats on one side and an image on the other does make perfect sense, I thought you were referring to having the stats on the back of the stand-ups.

I think the system is great, I think the products out for it so far are great, and I think the art is great. Like the thread title states, these were minor gripes. Besides the missing index in the core set books FFG has done a great job with this edition so far, the new GM book has an index so thats the only major issue solved (as long as all future releases also have them). If they can now gradually smooth off some of the minor things in future sets this could easily be the greatest rpg of the current crop.

Congzilla said:

That would be very wrong indeed. I want the freedom to change the stats or to have the standups represent something else when I need to.

Congzilla said:

I think there are some really awesome ideas in it, but there's quite a number of places where the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Not just the missing index, but the entire organisation of the rulebook is pretty awful. I'm also mildly disappointed by some of their choices on which components to put in which set, a few missed opportunities like the cards with stats, and some stylistic choices. But only mildly. There's plenty of good stuff that makes up for it. Still, there is a lot of room for improvement. If they use it, WFRP could easily become the best RPG ever.