souljawebb said:

Well, here I would like to refer to my previous post where I talk about changing the background of the WH World retroactively to fit the current edition of WFB. The Empire had squires in 1st and 2nd edition WFRP, not only rules-wise, but also as a background element...

And while Pistolier may indeed be a fitting entry point for some knightly orders, that certainly doesn't account for all of them, with the White Wolves of Ulric (spurning firearms, or did they change that part of the background too?...) as the most glaring example.

Besides, if all Empire knights were trained pistoliers, what's keeping them from carrying a brace of pistols holstered to their horses as backup? You don't even see that in WFB!

Looking for the "right" path of careers is going to drive any normal human insane. Unless a career says "requires completion of X" it's going to be up to the needs of the group/roleplaying/etc. In the past I have seen Knights arise from common backgrounds when knighted by someone (Enemy Within Campaign for example), so I would just let it roll and if Pistolier works for the player/situation then groovy. Otherwise....let it happen as best fits your campaign imo.

Callidon said:

I guess you're right Callidon. If someone wants to start out as squire, I'll let them use either the soldier or pistolier template (whichever is most appropriate), and let them pick fitting skills/talents/actions.

For players who like to pick randomly, and don't like the pistolier template as a precursor to knight (maybe because of the firearms or so for Ulricans), I'll let them exchange the pistolier for the soldier template and interpret it as a squire if they so wish, and let them pick their skills, talents and actions accordingly.

The careers in this edition are seemingly supposed to be more 'generic' anyway, as there are lots more different options within the same career as in the previous editions. In fact, that's why I allow players to pick their finished careers 'again' if they so wish (they still pay for the transition tho, but count as a next rank). That way you can get very experienced Bounty Hunters, Wardancers, etc. So if you want to become an uber-cool Bounty Hunter, it's possible without being forced to start another career. Also, why should a Sword Master or Wardancer be forced to become something else? They could just stay in the cool careers they are in if they so wish. They could still change careers if they wanted to of course. Maybe the new 'Veteran' career will provide for some interesting options.

From what ive gathered from reading the current ed (I have no experience with the previous eds) the pistollers is simply the most common way that noble children get the experience that they need to then join the Knightly Order of their choice. It is not actually a requirement, just a very common path. I dont remember anything in particualr about the Ulric knights distaining firearms, but could easily have glossed over that part. In the end there is no required class to become a knight, but every order has some sort of test that a candidate needs to pass in order to join, do well in a tourney, kill a wolf with your bear hands, etc. oh and you cant forget the generous donation that the nobles family will often give to the order for the privlidge of attempting to join!

Historically, in Germany, pistoliers were often lesser nobles that found equiping as a pistolier much more feasible for them than equipping to become a heavy lancer. I know the Empire isn't Germany, but still, can be helpful.

The loss of the Squire career is unfortunate indeed... But I think you could simply use the Knight career and consider the character a squire until his 5th or 6th advance in the career...

In play, the problem with squires is that they need knights. So a PC squire would either be squire to a PC knight, or to an NPC knight.

So from a metagame standpoint, having a starter PC start off as knight is much simpler. The creation process will give this knight 3 or 4 skills to start with, making him fairly competent. (Ride and WS seem like prequisites to knighthood...)

Once in play, a PC could desire to move into the knight career. So you could then enforce a houserule that you will get your spurs only after 5 or 6 advances, before that you are a squire.

Otherwise, these careers could be interpreted as squires, with very different knightly bosses...

Mercenary - squire to a knightly knight, adventurous type, good warrior, sees a lot of action

Servant - squire to a posh knight

Soldier - squire to a knight part of a larger order, often grouped with other squires into light cavalry units

Pistolier, Sergeant, Captain... could all lead to knight.

My first temptation is to say: Make it up, you're the GM and you can dictate how the world works.

The problem is, it's not that simple. (Well it is and it isn't) Warhammer is very nearly unique in that it has tons of rich background traditions and histories that are not only detailed but also really good. With any world setting like say... Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms, there were backgrounds but they were more like the dots of a connect-the-dot picture - things you can work with. Coming into Warhammer, I often feel like I'm entering a fully developed world and I have to pay as much respect to the setting as if I was setting the game in the players' home town.

In some ways this hampers your ability to say "In the empire, there are no squires / there are squires", but in many other ways I find that it makes the world much more visceral and real for the players (and me too). So what to do?

I do not envy the folks at FFG for the task they have - they created a brilliant system, one that I hope is going to influence game designs across the industry and now they have the grim and perilous task of trying to introduce new and improved material to a horde of veteran players who are every bit as stuck in their 2nd ed. ways as surly dwarf with his favorite brand of ale.

This being said, I doubt the FFG team are novices to the genre, I doubt they make any decisions lightly or without reason. I have faith that they examine their options and choose what is best.

Personally, I let them be the judge of what is possible or not - if they didn't include a squire, neither do I. I do this for two reasons: 1) I truly believe they've give these decisions some thought and weighed 2nd edition to where they want to take the expansions (also looking at party compositions etc.) 2) When a player takes issue with something based on their personal understanding of the Warhammer World, I can turn to the 3rd ed. rules and supplements as the unbiased canon - it doesn't put me in an antagonistic position to say No.

Of course, at the end of the day, it's your game and your decision... this is just my thoughts/ramblings on the subject.

Jericho said:

I agree fully, that way the Squire can come from any background depending on the knights style and how the players want it. And can progress into fitting careers and keep on beeing a squire to the knight (if the players want to).

If there was a squire career the problem in my mind would be that the PC playing the squire would sooner or later progress into another career like knight for example, then the PC playing the knight needs a new squire (and the new knight would need a squire). I would like Knights to have a companion sheet for their squire instead, like the small but vicious dog for ratcatchers. That way the knight would allways have it's squire and could get som benifits from it.

Being a noble could be simulated by taking at least 1 social connections talent and some starting money, maybe spending some points on education so he can read and write regardless of career.

Half of the careers in Omens have the Noble trait, although 3 of those are for the Knight progression. It may be more than half, but I can't remember if Captain has it.

May I ask what the mark of Khorne card gives to it's bearer?

Callidon said:

This is one of the things I just don't get with FFG. Why did they bring out the Game Master's (and Player's) Guide now? I mean, I know why, they were responding to criticism, but now, for example, they have a list of conditions in the Game Master's Guide that *is not complete* (does not have Frenzied!). Not sure if there are new rules in Omens (or in the Slaanesh expansion when it comes) but they'll be missing too. Should have waited until all of the rules were actually published before putting out the GM's Guide...

There's so going to be a "3.5" version (collating everything) realised in a year or two (once all of the rules are actually in print in some format or another).

Sorry to sidetrack this thread – still eagerly waiting for my copy of Omens to arrive

heptat said:

They were working to expand their audience. It's bad business to wait on that kind of thing.

They aren't at all unique in that way. Supplements happen.

They could also put out a "Player's Guide 2" down the road that contains the careers in Omens of War, the Slaanesh supplement, and perhaps some elf and dwarf stuff along with updated charts. They could probably put out a similar supplement for GMs.

I agree that it's a bit of an awkward setup but if they're getting more people to spend money on the game then more power to them.

Ultimately, I think the books were a poor decisions, especially at this time.

In response to the specific question, though... isn't Frenzy all ready in there? I thought when I was adding the cards to my collection there were already some Frenzied cards from some other source.

RARodger said:

I think 'Ultimately' might be a poor choice of phrasing. Most RPGs have a core book an expand it...in fact this is a common criticism of systems that expand beyond their core books - new variations on mechanics. At the end of the day is the original game changed or broken by them? Nope.

If you take the stance that the books were a poor decision then there are two logical precursors - 1) you use the core set to play the game (non-core set players were begging for the book releases), that's awesome; 2) you use the books as a reference guide or omnibus....I'm sorry to say but the books don't seem to have been intended for that. These books are specifically for people who want the core set rules without the bits.

Those books contain more than the core set rules so those people are getting everything we got in our core set books and a bunch of bonus material. Are they missing out when Omens of War is released? Not if they don't mind buying the set with the bits...if they do, then yes they may have to wait until new hardbacks are compiled or perhaps when the new rules are released in PDF format - you will not that there are PDFs of the box set campaigns/adventures for the hard-back people.

I have seen griping about the hardbacks on other forums and I have to say that most of the complaints are from people who thought they were buying a be-all end-all reference guide...which, other than justifying the purchase of both core + books, just doesn't make sense to me as an argument. I can't imagine complaining to D&D, Rifts, GURPS or Traveller that their core books didn't contain every rule introduced in later supplements.

I can certainly see the point that book only people will have to wait for their supplements for a long time, so - like I said - I'm not sure the books were an entirely good idea; but they met a desire of the customers so I'm quite certain they weren't a bad idea.

RARodger said:

Frenzy isn't listed – page 166 of the GM's manual. I do have the cards as well, but I find myself using the tables they have included (from critical wounds to diseases, as well as the list of conditions) instead of the cards. I happily use the cards for actions and talents, but I find it useful to limit the number of cards on the table. I guess they can always (PDF) release updated tables with all wounds etc. in them since there is only about 10 pages worth.

Just picked up my copy of Omens from Orc's Nest in London. I have a couple of evenings to integrate everything before my next session on Friday. Here's hoping one of my players pulls a severe injury! (It's okay, I'm not mean enough to hope that they exceed the severity threshold).

Perhaps we'll get two OoW to have more severe injury cards to put in the deck.

I've read Omens of War now (and started on the Liber Carnagia) and I have to echo previous comments about the mass battle rules being non-existent. I wasn't expecting WFB levels of detail, but one or two examples of using progress trackers etc. to abstract a large engagement yet still allow the PCs to influence the action would have been nice.

Other than that I enjoyed the background material, mounted combat rules seem simple and sensible and I like the fact that they cover prosthetics etc. in the severe wound section. I also quite like the new action cards and careers, probably not as much as my players will though! One player in particular will be very happy that he's got the Veteran career available just as he hits rank 2...

And how did you like the adventure? Adventures are always my favourite Part in these supplements.

RARodger said:

Well generally I'm one of those people who ******* about everything that's not too my liking, too expensive, too many typos and rules errors.. I think I've hammered FF games on these issues (and several have still not been corrected satisfactorily. About the hardcover guides, I have to disagree with the dissenters and say they were pretty good products. True new rules have been added that cannot be included in a book printed before they came out but this is always the case in every single rpg I've ever read or played. FF also said that the guides were a one time only event but we will see if the financial rewards are great enough we might see a Guide 2 hardcover with up dated rules, and it would make sense as well since I'm sure I'm not the only one who likes to have both the rules in card form as well as in book format, but with FF and the fact that this is a licensed GW product who knows. I would have at least thought they would have given us some glimpse into what the line will do in the near future and other than Black Fire Pass they have not said much : ((

Btw, for the Danes... I picked up Omens yesterday at Faraos

My Soldier and Bounty Hunter (who're both at 9 xp), are gonna be quite excited when I show them the new toys they can pick... especially the soldier might really like "Bulwark" traited action cards.

Oh, and I guess with this new supplement defences has just been boosted quite a lot.

My Amazon-Fu says release date: August 2011 ... REALLY????

Does anybody has an idea where to get it sooner?

Relborn said:

I had pre-ordered this back in December and when I saw the August 2011 date I just cancelled and ordered it from my local store, got it in less than a week in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Don't bother with Amazon unless you're ordering a book.

Necrozius said:

More appropriately, don't pre-order rpgs from amazon. They are great for the material that has been out a while.