Hey guys,

Well, it looks like while I was busy getting ready to get married, you guys finally got rid of the old WHFRP 2 thread. Which I am a little sad to see. Ah well, I'm sure it has a home somewhere.

Meanwhile I received a rather large box of WHFRP 3 for my birthday and I figured I'd share my opinions with you and what I hope to be doing in the future with regard to it. It might be a bit negative, but I don't feel the need to hide my preference for the original version, but still, I think it deserves trying out.

So far, I've actually just sat down with some freinds and garnered opinions from them, while rolling dice and slapping together some characters and overall, I have to say, it's pretty negative. There are too many bits, cards and rules mechanics. The game seems more like a board game or a card game rather than an RPG. I'm inclined to agree with them. There does seem to be too much focus on making a card based on every action imaginable. I'll admit that at the end of my last whfrp2 game I was trying to mess around with the turn system, but I quickly found that the best way to play whfrp2 was hand my PC's a d100 and say "wing it."

I'm not sure that has really been accomadated in the new game. I think making a card for everything takes that little bit of ingenuity from the game.

On the positive side, the artwork is pretty good and there are some aspects of the turn and combat system that I do like. Fatigue is a nice system when you couple it with manouvres, it tends to make your PC's think more carefully about what they want to do. I'm not entirely sure there is enough fluff within the starting books.

PC's are all far too overpowered, and epic. High elf swordmaster? Don't like it. Ratcatcher I do like, especially now that you've made stuff for the small but vicious dog, but the AT seemed like a box about three careers with some filler thrown in.

I don't like the books being so small! RPG's generally have pages and pages of text, rules etc. In that you can chuck in loads of extra filler. Giving players something to help them soldify the idea of their character, also, I only play WHFRP three or four hours a week, I want something to read and mess around with, can't do that with cards, certainly not in work.

Hopefully going to run a game after I get married so I'll have more feedback soon, also, will more than likely buy the GMTK and WOM, but we would have to see afterwards how interested I am.

Anyway, will post more as I test it out more. Overall, not, as I thought initially, unsalvagable, but will have to work on it alot myself.

First off, when you get more time to read the forums, you'll find that there have been numerous threads about the 'bits'. The short story is, you don't have to use them. They are very useful and actually quite fun to use, but they aren't necessary. There have been numerous sheets designed that eliminate the need for them. There's nothing in there that couldn't be replaced by a pencil and paper. They look a bit overwhelming at first, but after using them a few games you find out how useful (and fast) they are.

You mentioned 'making a card for everything'. There's already a 'card for everything'. It's called 'Perform a Stunt'. For casters, it's called 'Cantrip'. These cards cover most circumstances. If you want a special card for something that Perform a Stunt or Cantrip doesn't cover, and it's not already in the deck, then you can use Strange Eons and the Warhammer Addon to create them. Or, you could simply write it down somewhere I suppose.

If you need to create characters fast (and accurately), look in my sig and grab the 'Character Helper'.

We've got a campaign going now. We're 12 games in, and it's working great. The mechanics and system quickly become second nature and the narrative dice add a great element for both the players and GM. The system is very supportive of story heavy GMs. There are some great tools for new and old GMs. Read the ToA. Even experienced GMs can get some new ideas from it (I know I did).

After a few games, the system fades into the background like a good system should. It supports my GM style perfectly and is now my system of preference.

Nez

I've only GM'd two sessions so far, and at first glance I think I would agree with the original poster. However, after actually running the game I found that if there wasn't an immediate action card for something I'd wing it! If it's something unusual that isn't a "stunt" roll a characteristic attempt determine the difficulty/challenge dies (though I made sure to let them know the difficulty prior to them rolling) and let the dice do the narration.

I absolutely love the system for "story mode" The encounters I've ran so far have been so-so, I'll have to figure out something to fluff it up a bit. As a player and a GM I'd almost rather not have battles and just RP the entire game hehe.

Well, it's not a boardgame. Nothing like a boardgame. Those components which work like a board game only facilitate game-play in giving easy to access information and create new, accountable, measurable systems for old abstract concepts. We actually played the game with stickered dice 1 month before the game was released without action cards at all. They aren't required and aren't necessary. Sure, a minor adjustment in damage mitigation is required (but the GM toolkit gives a way to do that), but other than that we played just fine without them. The system is all about winging it. The dice are the absolute best at winging anything in the history of RPG. They add so much narrative depth it is absurd and gives players and GM's a great deal of manipulative control over the game itself.

The only thing you're experiencing, based on your list of complaints, is a sort of culture shock to strong and fundamental progressive change to the overall structure of RPG'S. To simply say it's less RPG and more board-game is simply because you haven't played it yet and is truly a reaction to the changes that FFG have made to RPG. A welcome change in my opinion to a dying market in desperate need of innovation. RPG'S became huge in the 70's and we've been using the same systems sense. Would you prefer a computer from the 70's compared to a modern one? That is not to sound snarky at al give it a try and you'll see it's simply a new way of playing games. If you sit down expecting the system to work in a specific way you're 100% used to, you will be absolutely disappointed. If you come at it with an open mind and actually notice the innovation from the dice to the cards to the trackers, you'll find a great deal of potential above and beyond what traditional big-game RPG'S had to offer and I will say a game that is leagues beyond most Indi RPG'S because of the broadness of the scope it covers. The only thing I ever complain about and still complain about the system is recharge. But we wiped that from our games entirely and with a few minor adjustments it plays great, more than great.

Honestly, I don't know how I will go back to other RPG systems after this one. We've been playing it twice a week now since the game came out and haven't looked back. Our story-telling and narrative play is amped beyond belief. 2e was a great game for what it was, but this system is leagues beyond it.

The other thing to remember, most of the system is a toolkit. Don't like the Swordmaster, cut it or make it a more advanced career. Choose the careers you want and let the player's pick from there. It doesn't actually violate the game in anyway to do so. They tried to make Warhammer more appealing to everyone and have done a great job. Now if you want a grim, gritty game, choose the careers for that. You want a high adventure, choose careers for that. It's also waaaay simpler to navigate these changes by simply pulling cards from a stack than making a separate list players have to cross reference.

Which really comes down to the fundemental point to the cards. Every game has a complex list of pre-defined actions. Swinging with two swords rather than one has a two weapon fighting special rule, this system just has printed it on a quick reference card. All systems have them, some just less than others or list them as "powers" via White-Wolf, but those powers are as intrinsic in those games as how you swing a sword in this one.

The other thing about the cards...if there are too many, too many actions defined...well, simply cut them. It's easy to do, just pull it from the stack. This allows for quick tailoring of the story and the type of limitations you want to impose as a GM to that system. I cut roughly twenty action cards from the Adventurer's toolkit and core and my system works just fine (cunundrum and twisted words are two I can think of off the top of my head). They aren't useful and in my opinion unecessary for my RPG experience. To me, they are written for less narrative players or new players who don't quite understand how to interface with the system, so I cut them. The nature of this edition is to "edit" it to whatever you want as a GM. If you don't have the time to do it, then don't, but honestly it took me two hours while watching Aussie football (so I wasn't paying all that much attention).

So, I strongly recommend don't hack something until you try it. I started out hacking out most of it, but the more I began to include from the set, the more I realized what they had designed and how great of a game it really is. And most of all, don't criticize this game before you've played a session or two and come in with an open mind and it will truly impress you.

The game seems more like a board game or a card game rather than an RPG.

I have seen this statement a couple of times now and I simply don't get it. It is a game system, it is a tool to tell a group story with rules to give actions fair random results. If you play it and it feels like a board game then your running the game wrong. Having run the system a couple times now I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt this system is a pure rpg, and more so it encourages role playing over roll playing more than most systems. It plays fast and the dice add a lot to the narrative. As far as rules go this game is simple and rules lite, there really aren't many rules at all and they all use the same underlying systems. The rules also give the GM amazing flexibility to assign a difficulty to anything the PC's can think of trying on the fly and gives the PCs the perform a stunt card so they can feel free to try anything.

In all honesty without having even played the game why would you bother commenting on how it "seems" especially since you have already stated that you are biased to a previous edition?

Crazy Aido said:

Um, mine was shipped without a board in it ... maybe that's why I don't get the "it's a board game" argument some people seem to have.

Crazy Aido said:

Wow, it's almost like I touched a nerve.

So I guess I'd better stand up and defend that statement huh? The principal of an RPG, for me, is in placing as much control at the player's fingertips as is possible by presenting them with an open, relatively simple system of play that will allow them to simulate almost any action by a simple enough role of dice. Through this they will take part in narrative constructed by their GM, who's principal is to give the group as much of a laugh as possible.

The principal of a board game or card game is to test the players tactical acumen by pitting them against another player with a set system of rules and finite actions that they take, which they will use in a series of combinations to outwit their opponent.

Looking through the current box set and at the rules it seems to be more a case of the latter than the former. At least to me. In some RPG games, the focus is more on tactical thinking and teamwork used to outwit dangerous foes. In others, it's about wandering around in a forest until something crawls out of a cave and eats you. I have to say, I've mostly played the latter style of game. But that style is genuinely fun for me. Where you try and outwit your opponent, fail miserably and then just charge in with your trousers around your ankles.

Giving me tokens, cards and funny looking dice is more likely to distract either me or my players from the real grit of RPG's. Descriptive and evocative play, where you don't choose a card, you say "CHAAAAAAAAAARGE!", is where RPG's are really coming from. You don't need fine tuned rules systems for that, you need robust systems that can be farted around with. When I play an RPG, I aim for my players to identify with their characters, so they look sad when I murder them. I don't think the current edition has that evocative capacity.

That said, I do still aim to run a game, after my wedding mind you, but still, I have a few ideas. It's an interesting mechanic as I've already mentioned and I look forward to having a little fun with it. It may well be that it can stand the test of time and my inveterate synicism. I still have to give it an awful lot of work in order to establish what it does and does not do well. I look forward to this trial phase with enthusiasm.

Finally, I'm glad to see that the WOM has a system for mutations, becuase that and a number of other nasty things have been lacking from alot of the information I've seen so far. WHFRP is not about being nice to your PC's.

No nerve to be touched actually, I'm having a blast running this system.

I think you should have bothered playing it before criticizing it as your criticisms are simply unfounded. This system puts so much more flexibility into the hands of both the player and the GM than any other system I know of. Honestly the "Perform A Stunt" card kinda says that on it's own.

Gah! For some weird reason, I can't get the quotes to work right, so I just put them in bold. Sorry 'bout that!

So I guess I'd better stand up and defend that statement huh? The principal of an RPG, for me, is in placing as much control at the player's fingertips as is possible by presenting them with an open, relatively simple system of play that will allow them to simulate almost any action by a simple enough role of dice. Through this they will take part in narrative constructed by their GM, who's principal is to give the group as much of a laugh as possible.

So the defining principle of an RPG for you is that it uses only dice, or that it's simple? If I use miniatures and battle maps, am I no longer playing an RPG? What if my system includes cards? (Even some old systems like 1ed. Changeling had cards!) It's true that many systems require only a "simple enough roll of the dice"--until you have to look up chart 11c on p. 397 that tells you what the d100 means in a given situation. Not so simple. I don't know what all you've played, but even 'just dice rolling' can end up being far more complicated and distracting than the cards and bits in this system.

Also, we all define 'as much of a laugh as possible' differently. All scenarios are meant to be fun on some level or we wouldn't play them, but what constitutes fun varies widely from group to group. Some groups find silly narratives funny; others find gut-wrenching, terrifying, or deeply emotional narratives satisfying. Some groups want everything handed to them so that they feel powerful, while others find only the constant threat of death worthwhile. Varying systems will suit all of these groups better or worse depending on their play styles, but there's not a one-size-fits-all system, so there's not a single definition of what makes a system "good" or even what makes a system a "real RPG."

The principal of a board game or card game is to test the players tactical acumen by pitting them against another player with a set system of rules and finite actions that they take, which they will use in a series of combinations to outwit their opponent.

Looking through the current box set and at the rules it seems to be more a case of the latter than the former. At least to me. In some RPG games, the focus is more on tactical thinking and teamwork used to outwit dangerous foes. In others, it's about wandering around in a forest until something crawls out of a cave and eats you. I have to say, I've mostly played the latter style of game. But that style is genuinely fun for me. Where you try and outwit your opponent, fail miserably and then just charge in with your trousers around your ankles.

I'm not sure I follow this criticism at all. You say that board games are about outwitting your opponent, then come back and say that you love RPGs in which you try and outwit your opponent.

At any rate, I don't see RPGs as being either of the alternatives you've described--for me and my group, they're primarily about storytelling and investigation. This system allows for that nicely, while still including satisfying combat.

Giving me tokens, cards and funny looking dice is more likely to distract either me or my players from the real grit of RPG's.

Perhaps your players are just easily distracted? I've heard the same charge leveled against, say, miniatures and scenery, but for many groups, they enhance rather than detract from the storytelling. Again, different strokes for different folks, but the use of any prop doesn't make something "not an RPG."

That said, I do still aim to run a game, after my wedding mind you, but still, I have a few ideas. It's an interesting mechanic as I've already mentioned and I look forward to having a little fun with it. It may well be that it can stand the test of time and my inveterate synicism. I still have to give it an awful lot of work in order to establish what it does and does not do well. I look forward to this trial phase with enthusiasm.

I hope that you do give it a try! (And I hope your new wife plays. We need more female players!!!) I think you'll find that what might seem distracting ends up being more of a support for good roleplaying and exciting gaming than it might at first seem.

The only down side I have found so far is that my dog ate a stress / fatigue token . So, Jay if you see this, if ya wanna, you know .

it was about time for another love letter from a wfrp2 fan. the board game accusation is so lame it is difficult to respect the opinions of anyone who makes it. just give the new version a try, you might even enjoy it!

Giving me tokens, cards and funny looking dice is more likely to distract either me or my players from the real grit of RPG's.

For some (usually beginner) players, even character sheets can be distracting.

I'm DMing a D&D4e campaign since december, and we are using cards made by us for abilities, monsters, and small pieces of papers for conditions. It came naturally to use them, since it speeds up gameplay. The few tables we need are also on a paper sheet. Can't tell you when was the last time I had to open the PHB/DMG/MM for information.

First of all thank you to several people for implying that I'm an idiot. Along with my players.

Secondly, I am giving it a try, that's what this thread is all about, me and my freinds trying it out. I haven't played as much I'd like to get a full picture, but I am trying it out. Please stop telling me to try it out.

Thirdly, thank you to bindlespin for pigeonholing me and ignoring what I have to say. This isn't about WHFRP2. This is about WHFRP3. If I want to talk about another game, I will go where that game is played and talk to the people who play it. Strange that so many people with so many years of roleplaying experience should come up with the same criticism.

Lianwyre, the problem for so many players is that the WHFRP3 "feels" like a boardgame. That I think, is the kernel of the arguments you'll find. I don't want to get into a nitpicking argument, but the jist of it is that the game focuses so strongly on it's mechanic that it ignores character development. The game, for many, does not allow for players to assume the roles of their character better, which is what roleplaying is all about after all,

The other problem that has scared off alot of old players is that it seems to them that an awful lot of the wonderfully gritty background and setting they were accustomed to in the setting has been done away with in favour of a more high fantasy setting.

Anyway, I'm late for work, I will return anon.

The V2 rulebook was nearly an inch thick, the new rulebooks aren't. Why? Because the cards have replaced much of the rulebook. So, instead of having to flick through a rulebook every couple of minutes, your cards are sitting right in front of you. I admit our group has playtested some of the products about to come out, and some not yet announced, and believe me all the "paraphenalia" no way gets in the way of any roleplaying. The scope for roleplaying in all the adventures we have done so far, is only limited to the GM's imagination in using the information given in the adventures. It has proven easy to tailor the adventures to our groups style and interests, and there are seven of us in our group. Yes, all the new stuff may look intimidating or unneceesary but they greatly speed up play and allow for more, not less, roleplaying without any dice rolling. I hope you give this a chance, the only thing necessary is an open mind.

As a new GM and leading a group of virgin PnP Roleplayers I can understand why the tokens can be a bit unwieldy at first, but they are just there to make it easier on the GM and the players and technically you could still track all of it with Pen and Paper. (Some are contemplating to do this because it will free up some more table space.)

The cards work great for us and that's all there is I can say about them.

We practiced combat a few times to become familiar with the dice mechanics and all the other stuff and today I'll be running the Day Late, a Shilling Short demo as one last practice run before I delve into the intro adventure in ToA. One of the practice combat rounds was a tavern fight with a bunch of 'neutral' patrons and a trigger-happy tavern-keeper and I must say; winging-it went as a blast. The dice really support a narrative and my players had a blast even though one was almost knocked unconscious by a burly and angry dwarf.

Crazy Aldo, when I read your initial post I wondered what would happen in the thread. It seemed to be the perfect start for a flame war. The main ingredients were certainly there: (a) t he board game argument , (b) the statement that you and your players feel negative about the game although you haven’t played it yet . There are other things in your initial post but these two alone are structurally sufficient to cause angry reactions. Why? Because they have been posted in a forum populated by people who obviously spent a lot of time and effort for this game because they enjoy it. Your post is similar to the post of an Linux user on a Windows forum that talks about Windows 7 being lame for this or that reason – without having done more than boot Windows 7 once.

When I read the first couple of posts answering your initial post I was surprised because they are so considerate and nice and actually did a great job of offering advice without simply dismissing your post. Of course, there weren’t particularly happy with your statement, but that really is to be expected under these circumstances.

Then you answer in a surprised manner stating: “Wow, it’s almost like I touched a nerve.” Well, of course you did! Nothing at all to be surprised of. Or did you really think people would jump forward and say: “Yeah, you’re right, we’re wasting a lot of time by posting about a lame game. I guess we should throw away all the shiny bits and get out a d100 and wing it, since until now weI have been completely absorbed in all those fancy cards and weren’t able to think of our own.”

I won’t try to address the actual argument itself – I really loved the 1st edition but I haven’t played a game of WFRP 3rd edition yet, so I feel that I am not qualified to make such an argument. But as a person with training in conversation analysis and with a long experience in web forums I definitely feel qualified to point out that there is little to be surprised about regarding the flow of the argument in this thread.

Enjoy your marriage!

Crazy Aido said:

My problem with this argument (and the argument of so many who come over here to complain about 3e) is that you can't possibly know yet how 3e feels . You haven't tried it. It may look like a boardgame, but on some basic level, DnD 2e and Changeling 1e look sort of the same, what with dice and rolls and character sheets...but in play, they're drastically different games, particularly once you've tried that incredibly wonky Changeling magic. You often can't tell until you've tried a game unless you have experience with similar games and/or know that there are certain aspects of play that your particular group just won't handle.

Since this game looks different than those most of us have played, it's hard to tell how it actually feels in play until you play it. I wasn't as skeptical as you are when I first saw the system because I've been burned out on RPGs for years and was ready for a new approach, but I wasn't sure that it would all "work" as neatly and cleanly as so many people said it did. In practice, though, I think you may find that it translates much more readily than you expect UNLESS you have players who really love nitpicking the rules.

I have some sympathy about your worry about the cards, but seriously, unless your players are either dingbats or extremely rules-focused, they won't be a problem. My players don't spend the majority of our session sifting through their cards; they spend the majority of our sessions talking to NPCs and developing their characters by interacting with the world, just as in any other RPG. Just as in any other RPG, too, they quickly get a sense for what their abilities are and only consult those cards when a rules question comes up. It's nice, though, to just let your player sit there and figure out the rule by himself by pulling out a tiny card rather than having the GM pull out a big book or, worse, have books shuffled from player to player and listen to the resultant discussion of "where was that rule again?" "isn't it modified by that other thing?" "what if it's a Tuesday?" "can you look up that thing about my magic wand while you have the book out?" that often comes up when someone pulls out a rulebook.

Crazy Aido said:

Have you read TGS yet?

i am sorry you feel pidgeon-holed, sounds uncomfortable. seriously, i think you are taking things the wrong way. what people (me) are trying to tell you is that after you actually play the game you are going to slap yourself and call yourself an "idiot" (which nobody else is) for calling the new edition a boardgame and for lacking the flavor of the original. it is obvious the game designers put a lot of effort into establishing the tone of the game. i think both Eye for an Eye and The Gathering Storm are great wfrp adventures. i don't know all the names of the writers off the top of my head (I like giving Dave Allen a lot of praise but I know there are others), but they all deserve a lot of credit. i read your whole post, and I thought by responding I was doing the opposite of ignoring it. and for real, congratulations on your wedding, many happy years!

Crazy Aido said:

I think we agree that the principal difference is: in a boardgame, players are limited by the rules. In an RPG, you can do anything. You're only limited by GM fiat (or the fiat of the player group). Boardgames don't have a GM because they don't need one. There are rules for everything that's allowed in the game. If there are no rules for it, it's not part of the game.

Crazy Aido said:

I don't see how WFRP is limited, with finite actions you can take. Yes, there are action cards, but you're not limited by them. Action cards represent not the limit of what you can do, but the tricks, actions and attacks that you're especially good at. But you can still try anything else if you want. Perform A Stunt, or just use a skill. Say what you want and let the GM decide what skill and characteristic to roll. All of that is still in there. It still relies heavily on GM fiat. More so than some big RPGs, in fact.

Crazy Aido said:

Then you should like this edition. It's anything but finely tuned. The resolution system is great for descriptive and evocative play. And it's very easy to fart around with. In fact, I think there's a lot in the system that requires tweaking. The rules are very clear on that you're supposed to add fortune and misfortune dice to taste. No completely list of modifiers for every little thing, just throw in as many dice as you think is appropriate.

Crazy Aido said:

I'm glad to hear that. I feel I simply have to give this system a fair chance, because it's so incredibly different from anything else I've seen in a long while. Are the extra bits a burden or a boon? I think tracking fatigue, recharge and wounds with tokens and cards is going to turn out to be as easy and transparent as rolling dice and tracking wounds in any other RPG, and I've read reviews that point out that this is indeed the case: the system quickly disappears (or so people claim).

In comparison, I've never been able to have the GURPS system disappear during play.

Crazy Aido said:

I look forward to mutations too. I also like what they did with insanities and critical wounds. Or actually, I like the basic ideas behind them. I'm not too happy about many of the actual crit and insanity effects (which tend to be rather lame). But I'll handsomely reward with fortune points any player who roleplays them beyond the rules on the card.

Llanwyre said:

I hear this a lot, and I recognise it myself. I think a big factor in old-timers accepting this new edition is exactly that: they're burned out on the old systems, but don't want to give up on roleplaying altogether, so they're looking for something new. The hope is that WFRP is that. I'm not 100% convinced yet either, but it looks promising, and I'm going to kick myself forever if I don't give this approach a fair chance.

On the other hand, old-timers who are not burned out (yet?), and are perfectly fine and comfortable with the old systems, are more likely to resent or fear this new approach. It's different, and the old way is good, so any change is likely to make it worse.

Llanwyre said:

We haven't played that often yet, but players (and I too, in fact) have a lot of trouble getting a good grasp of what we can expect from the action cards. There's no clear overview of what the cards do, and what's more: the mechanics are new, so we have no idea what it all means in practice. Does the guy who took Accurate Shot realise that its only advantage over Ranged Shot is that he can spend stress for extra fortune dice? On the other hand, it takes time to get a good grasp on any system. D&D's feats can be pretty impenetrable, as can GURPS's advantages or Earthdawn's many Talents.

Llanwyre said:

That's the really big one. My group has played Earthdawn for ages, and even after many years, we were looking up the exact rules of the Talents we were using every single session. It would have been so much easier to have that on cards.

At the same time, I think WFRP doesn't put enough on cards. I still need to look some stuff up. Monster stats, for example. Give me cards for that! With a nice picture on the back so I can show my players who they're fighting or talking to. It would fit wonderfully with the FFG philosophy.

Crazy Aido said:

Crazy Aido said:

I won't nit-pick by pointing out that you said you hadn't tried it out and were waiting to get married, then turn around and say you have tried it (lol). Seriously, just a joke. I find your notion that your limited perception of "board game feel" swelled to "so many players." Where are you coming from is all I'm asking, lol.

All joking aside, the grittiness is still there if you want it to be there. If you want it to be a game of high adventure fantasy (like the current Warhammer miniature game) then there is that possibility as well. This is a welcomed change from the old edition where players were forced into a single mode of play thus alienating some of the fan base, thus lower sales, thus lower suppliments. This game comfortably allows players to access whatever they want from Warhammer with easy to use modifications of simply pulling career cards.

The game is just as deadly, just as low heroics if that's how you design your game. Want more heroics more henchmen, less heroics no henchmen. NPC baddies are just as brutal as ever.

I went back to re-read your old post and many of your original concerns you posted back in August you seem to haven't changed your mind about.

While I do agree FFG used board-game elements to design their RPG the play of it feels nothing like a boardgame. I've played numerous board-games and all of them lack the depth, the character, the narrative elements this game creates. When you get passed the component interface with a game system both board games and RPG's are fundementally the same. You take on the role of a specific character (be it simply a band of pegs in sorry) who must achieve an objective through the use of dice and a rule system. More complex board-games you take on larger aspects of being a player such as commander of a fleet, a country, etc. The boardgame Descent by FFG is basically Diablo the board game and similarly, fantasy adventuring the board game, which is fundamentally the same as playing any RPG where you go crawl through a dungeon to slaughter monsters except the characters are pre-generated (which they can be for many, many modules out there).

So ultimately, what does set an RPG apart from a board game then? The roleplay element which fundamentally comes down to character, narrative, plot, conflict, obstacles that are not mechanically based, but story driven. WFRP 3e is exactly that and excels at that alone.

This game is tailored toward the narrative experience, plain and simple. If a game as tailored to narrative play as this one is how can it then create the flat, leaden feel of a board-game? It may "feel" like a board game through the use of tokens, etc, but I can say that hatch marks and counting off numbers and writing down wound effects rather than receiving a card with all that info typed out is not in anyway different than using counters and chits...they are just two ways to do the same thing. Does the hatch-mark really make other RPG'S so much more evolved than a game that uses a counter for the exact same thing? I'd say no, it doesn't. Are other RPG'S so advanced that they use feats or in the case of 2e Talents and specific combat maneuvers printed in a manual so much more evolved from board games than a system that uses cards for the same thing?

This system is not bound to the action cards either. Use them if you want, don't if you don't want to. A player will have roughly 4 (above and beyond the basic ones) that they will have at their disposal. They give them an edge in specific situations, however, a player can still operate just fine without an action card. If you push the use of the maneuver system you can do amazing things, if you are more creative, more apt at winging it, then you should be rewarded with white dice, fortune in the party pool, etc.

Characters can still advance and advance well and are by far just as interesting as they always were. Sure FFG has not pumped out enough careers yet, but the game is new. What you enjoy about 2e had roughly fifteen years of development in terms of careers, etc. than this game does. Give 3e 15 years and you'll see the same (and probably more) career options as 2e.

In no way has this game limited my communities RPG experience, it has only enhanced it. I run this game twice a week at multiple venues and yes, I commonly here "board-game" about it, but after three or four sessions, they shut up about it. Because it simply is untrue. Every game is what you make it, so if you and your group sit down and say, this is a board game (as you were saying back in August when it was a really popular thing to criticize the game over) and approach it like that, you will get a board game. I can get the same board-game feel out of 2e where we generate a few flat characters, throw them on a "battle grid" and use dice as we cleave our way toward our destiny of fat loots and xp, simply using hatch-marks instead of chits. If I want an RPG from 3e, that's what I'll get and possibly the best narrative experience from a game that I have had in fifteen years of gaming, by a system that supports those elements.

The proof is in the play...as long as you actually care to play an RPG with it.

mcv said:

I second this, except, playing this game a lot, I can say MCV that the system does fall to the background. The action cards can be the weak link in ca this game and they are the part I've always taken issue with in Warhammer. Besides recharge (which I'd like to send back to the black hell from which it spawned - and have by not using it) some of the cards can seem (and often are) way better than others or they're simply awful - dramatic flourish anyone? But I think they were created around a more narrative than mechanical perspective. For instance, I shoot accurately would warrant accurate shot over Rapid Fire, which is tons better...it just may not be that character's style. Accurate shot also does a boat load of additional damage if the dice come up right compared to cards such as Rapid Shot (though Rapid Shot could generate more damage, but has to go through a more difficult roll set). Accurate shot allows for power in its shots because of the involvement of the white dice benefit. They are relatively balanced against one another, but not entirely.

I was actually quitting RPG's all together until 3e came out. I was simply sick of them and found that there was nothing "new" I could tell with the existing games. This system changes the way things are told by simply giving players so much power and ability to invest in the story. That change drastically changes what happens in a game. Pushing that element, I have found an entirely new way to tell combats, encounters, adventures, choices, conflicts, obstacles, etc. This system is fantastic and I will say it is one of the best systems I have ever played, bested only by a very few because of how well tailored they are to the specific genre they were created for and that opinion is quickly changing by the day. I honestly don't see how I could ever go back to using standard dice after these dice, I simply don't.

The fact Deathwatch (a game I have been waiting for for 20 years) won't be on this system is the reason I won't be buying it. Simply, this mechanic is leagues beyond what the old 2e system did (except for the speed of combat) and the dice are way more interesting than standard dice.

mcv said:

That's an awesome attitude. The best I think any gaming company can hope for. You don't want fans just to accept blindly because of the IP, but you also don't want them dismissing new stuff just because it's new.

mcv said:

This I understand less, I guess. I have another favorite system that I think was also "ruined" by an update, but I didn't feel the need to give the company or fans of the new edition my personal "feedback." I just went on eBay and bought as many copies of the old rulebooks as I could in case I decided to run the original system again. Given that fluff and adventures are usually possible to translate, there's no need to have a nervous breakdown about a new system unless the narrative background changes significantly (IMHO).

mcv said:

No overview is an excellent criticism, and one I hadn't thought much about. It's just not the way my group plays, for the most part. They tend to take actions that "sound about right" for their characters and then get on with the story. If you're the kind of player that wants to maximize tactically, though, I get why the cards might drive you nuts.

mcv said:

Yeah, I've struggled to find a great way to deal with easy access to stats. The best solution I've come up with so far is to put all the stats in a database in my iPad and search from there, but I've also found that making a printed chart for every game of the NPCs/monsters that the party's likely to contact also works. Both are pretty time consuming, though, and one requires electronics.

I think people say it's like a boardgame because we really have no other frame of reference to compare it to. Although D&D 4e (the miniatures non-roleplaying wargame from hell) started using the "cards" in the mainstream, WFRP3 has simplified the multiple level-based modifiers that went with the un-evolved system of power cards that D&D started with. The difference is that D&D has it in BOTH the book and on a card.

Boardgames of course have a board. If anything, it's a roleplaying card-game..but it's not that simple

Instead, they should be saying, "It's like WFRP3."

jh

Emirikol said:

I have the same problem with people saying this is a board game as I do people saying D&D 4e is "non-roleplaying". D&D 4e offers just as much roleplaying ability as any other version of D&D, any version of WFRP, or Pathfinder. These are all just rules system for resolving actions, roleplaying comes from the players not the system.