FYI for you guys out there. I noticed the Players Guide does NOT include the Errata for Double Strike. It messes up both the recharge for reckless and the text for conservative stances.

Double strike is still broken compared to other cards. A +2 to damage for most other cards and double strike, you're doing 9+ extra points of damage every other round. Hmmmm. Any thoughts?

jh

What happens when a character is using double strike and has a sword in one hand and a spear (fast) in the other. How does that affect recharge time?

jh

What I find really strange is that my Double Strike card from the Player's Vault is the errata'ed (i.e. correct) version. If FFG bothered to print a new card, I'm surprised they missed it in the Player's Guide. That's just sloppy editing, which is a big reason I haven't purchased more WFRP 3rd edition products. The amount of needless errors is truly annoying, especially for such a beautiful-looking game.

Oddly enough, the text for Rapid Fire is correct in the Player's Guide (and the PV has the correct card for it).

Emirikol said:

I'd ignore the fast quality ruling that you'd use the slowest weapon to decide the recharge time.

Yipe said:

Has anyone contacted FFG recently about whether their (reckless) stance on this has changed to one that actually supports adopters of this game - like they do with ALL their other games!

I thought they didn't include the Double Strike errata in the Player's Vault because they didn't want anyone to feel pressured to buy the Players Vault to get a correct version of the card. In fact I think somone mentioned that they were going to put that corrected card in a new supplement. I'd guess Omens of War. You know if they put it in the Player's Vault people would complain that they'd have to buy the Vault to get the fixed card.

Naw, that's not the case. They fixed other stuff, like the spear and whatnot (and also rapid shot). Its a simple ommission, possibly by someone who doesn't play the game enough... Although there's been a lot of groaning today, I'm going to clarify that I suspect that there needs to be a bit more play of this game at FFG instead of just playtesting. Their hobby may have become work instead of love.

jh

Hidaowin said:

Unnacceptable in my eyes, and out of character. With ALL previous games when I've had an issue, they have bent over backwards to provide support. We're asking for around half a dozen cards and they are not budging.

I find Double strike rather weak actually.

It forces you to wield two weapons, you therefore have to give up on the possibility of wielding a great weapon or a shield.

When you do manage to get the double striking effect, the defender gets to use his damage resistance value twice, meaning only weak opponents get really slaughtered by the card, as opposed to a reckless cleave, a thunderous blow, etc.

So, in the end, you get a good damage potential on lowly opponents by relinquishing high damage on all targets (great wep) or by relinquishing block. Also you have to use strength as ability, it therefore is not much good to AGI characters.

Considering the above, and considering the importance Dual Wielding is given in the setting (ever looked at a WFB army book?), I actually believe Dual Wielding should be interpreted favorably. I therefore allow players to use weapon qualities of primary weapon always, and of secondary weapon if the double strike activates.

Finally, to really make the block a sacrifice, and considering Dual Wielding with a spiked buckler shouldnt give the same block facilities as a proper shield, I houseruled that Block cannot be used with Bucklers, only parry could. This extra bit doesnt change the reasoning above.