Are any of these rules real or are they all house-rules?

By tcrudisi, in WFRP Rules Questions

As the title asks: Are any of these rules real or are they all house-rules? I only have access to the Player's Guide, whereas the DM has access to all the books, so in some of these questions he's blatantly going against the Player's Guide, so I'm left wondering if these rules are countermanded in a different book.

1. Our archers do 1 damage against skeletons. This is because the minimum damage on a hit is always 1. The DM is saying that all piercing attacks would normally hit for 0 on skeletons. (This is a big one. Three of our 6 characters are archers and one of our 3 melee characters uses a Rapier. So only 2 out of 6 characters can hit for more than 1 damage, even on a crit.)

2. If you go into a career that has an advanced skill, you acquire that skill for free, automatically. (A player went into Apprentice Wizard and was able to purchase 1 dot in Channeling for 1xp, 1 dot in the casting skill for 1xp, and 1 dot in Mystic Sight for 1xp ... and he had not acquired any of them.)

3. To determine the amount of purple dice used in combat, compare your attack stat to the same stat for the enemy. For example, if you are making a melee attack, for each 2 points you are above their stat, reduce the purple dice by 1. Purple dice begin at 3 and go down to 1 if you have Strength 6 or Agility 6.

4. Armor stacks, it just lowers the effectiveness of the stacking armor by 1. So you can stack the Ironbreaker Armor with Leather Armor. Ironbreaker Armor is 2 black dice, 5 soak, I think. Leather Armor is 0 black dice, 2 soak (once again, I think). If you wear both, the Leather Armor only adds 1 soak. So our Ironbreaker is wearing 4 different kinds of armor and can literally only be hurt for 1 point of damage with every attack because he soaks so much damage.

5. The engagements don't make sense to me. I can be engaged with an ally who is engaged with an enemy, but I do not have to be engaged with the enemy. Furthermore, disengaging too fast will result in an "Opportunity Attack". And I can disengage behind an ally who is very close to me and the enemy can't get past that ally to swing at me. One person can engage only one enemy at a time. Multiple people can engage the same enemy, but you can never engage more than one enemy at a time.

6. A Fortune Point (FP) can be spent to negate any attack coming your way. This has literally saved my "not armored butt" a couple of times. It seems way too powerful, though. Especially when combined with the party card: Brash Young Fools (BYF). The GM has ruled that we put the new FP onto BYF at the start of a new round. So, we use a FP to ignore the attack, and if we run out of personal FP's, we can take from BYF to avoid the attack. Basically, at least one attack will ALWAYS miss every round, even if we are all out of our personal FP's, as we will just steal from BYF.

7. See #6. I assume we are using BYF incorrectly because, otherwise, there's no reason for anyone to ever pick a party card except for BYF. That's ridiculously powerful.

8. Fortune Points can be spent retroactively. Fail a check? Keep spending a FP until you succeed. (Ironically, this makes one of our group talents a bit silly. We have a talent that lets us add 2 white dice for an untrained skill check, so if we've failed the roll and want to spend FP's to get fortune dice, we get 2 per FP with that talent, rather than 1 if we are trained.)

9. I keep reading on the forums about how dangerous diseases and insanities are, but we've not seen one. We're barely getting fatigue or stress, which seems like it would be the thing that would lead to insanities. We've played 6 sessions so far and I've received a total of 0 in both. Others have received some by getting the crit failure in combat and getting 1 fatigue. Or, we've had a tiny amount of stress come into play only when we roll a crit failure on a fear check at the beginning of every combat.

10. Which reminds me, we roll a Fear check at the beginning of every combat. So far, we've only fought undead, but we've fought them several times. Always the exact same skeletons. Does the penalty always remain the same? So if we fight these exact same skeletons 100 times, we have to make a Fear check 100 times?

11. This one's already been corrected in another thread, but I'm ranting at this point. There's no limit on how we improve our skills. So, as a Scribe, I get 4 skill points, but I can put 3 of them into Discipline to raise that up to 3 and drop the last one into Education, for example.

12. (Flavor question) Is it really the mission of the Troll and Giant Hunter careers to die and that's why they don't wear armor?

13. I'm a bit confused on the dedication bonus. If you complete a career (10 points in class), do you automatically get the dedication bonus or are you required to spend an 11th xp just for the dedication bonus?

14. I can't remember the name of it, but there's a basic action card that lets you give a bonus to defense for all allies in your engagement (1 hammer = 1 black dice to all attacks and 3 hammers = 2 black dice). I think you roll Willpower + Discipline or something like that. It doesn't have any dice on it, but it is an action in combat. Do you automatically add purple dice to it when rolling it or not?

15. Same as #14, except for magic spells like Magic Dart. Does this get a purple dice or not? And when quick casting, do you add a purple dice? Our confusion stems from the fact that it doesn't have a penalty dice on the card.

16. We did a contested action against the enemy. I figured a contested action would just be "they both roll their stats with any penalty dice or fortune dice as deemed by the GM and compare the results". Instead, the GM gave the player 3 of the purple dice and said that was the difficulty, then rolled 0 purple dice for himself. Was this correct?

I'm sure there will be more later after I've had time to think on it some more. This is just what came to my immediate mind. Thanks in advance, guys!

Answers by number. I put quotation marks around "right" and "wrong" here, for semantic reasons. I really don't like calling a GM "wrong" for making a house rule, but it's the easiest way to talk about this. House-rules are legit, but it's also legit to be upset about house-rules that are nonsensical or inconsistently applied.

1-8: These are all clearly either houserules or misunderstandings. None of those things work that way in the Rules As Written. Brief summaries of the official rules for each of these:

  1. Skeletons ignore Criticals, not normal wounds.
  2. Wizards do get bonus skills at character creation, but not if a character starts as something else and transitions into Wizard.
  3. Most attacks (anything that says "vs Target Defense") start at 1 Purple.
  4. Armor doesn't stack per the RAW, and Ironbreakers are ridiculously tough even with "just" their Gromril.
  5. There's a lot "wrong" here, and I can't elegantly summarize it all.
  6. Fortune points just don't do that, per the rulebook. They have a much smaller impact.
  7. The party Fortune Pool on the Party Card doesn't work like that. You can't just take them from the pool at will, the refresh has to be triggered which usually takes several turns, even with Brash Young Fools in play.
  8. Per the rulebook, Fortune points must be spent before the roll. Some folks house-rule otherwise.

9: It's _possible_ you've just gotten lucky, but given points 1-8, I'm guessing something's being done "wrong" there as well. In practice, Insanity is relatively rare, but getting some amount of fatigue or stress is a thing that happens every single session at most tables. One very unlucky PC in my group suffered 9 fatigue in a single fight yesterday.

10: Sounds like your GM at least got this part "right". There's no general rule for becoming immune to Fear tests. (At least one published campaign does suggest the GM skip the fear tests late in the campaign after the players have encountered a lot of same monsters, but that's not really a rule.)

11: House-rule, as you know, and it clearly has a big impact on play balance and power level.

12: True. Troll slayers can only earn back their honor by dying gloriously in battle against a much more powerful foe. Suicide by Troll (or Giant, or Dragon, or Daemon, etc).

13. Dedication bonus costs 1 XP. This is clarified in the FAQ, and wasn't terribly clear in the original boxed set.

14. The card you're thinking of is called "Guarded Position". It does not normally have a purple die. The automatic purple die is only for cards that say "vs Target Defense". Others just use the dice indicated on the card (remember to look at the upper left corner for extra dice symbols). Guarded position is easy, and effective, but it comes at the cost of not getting to attack that turn.

15. No purple dice on Magic Dart. Same reason.

15b. Quick casting adds 1 purple to the spell. If you read the Quick Casting card itself, this is explained.

16. Assuming you meant "Competitive Check" (and NOT "Opposed Check") when you said "contested action", there are many possible iterations where the dice pools mentioned would be "right", and it's impossible for us to know if this was done "wrong" without seeing the character sheets of everyone involved in the roll, and knowing all the terrain cards in play and other circumstances. So you're out of luck there.

Edited by r_b_bergstrom

I... think your GM should reread the rulebooks.He seems to just be making stuff up instead of actually looking up the rules.

I with Ralzar on this one. Your GM really should read the rules again or at least discuss his house rules with players. Several of the points you mentioned especially 16 strikes me as the GM just making up stuff to force the "correct" outcome of the situation.

Ps: For 2: Is the player the buddy of the GM?

I with Ralzar on this one. Your GM really should read the rules again or at least discuss his house rules with players. Several of the points you mentioned especially 16 strikes me as the GM just making up stuff to force the "correct" outcome of the situation.

Ps: For 2: Is the player the buddy of the GM?

We're all buddies of the GM. He doesn't play favorites or anything like that. At least, he hasn't in the past. It's far more likely that it's just a rules misunderstanding or an intentional house-rule that he's just not informed us about.

I bolded the most important part of your response, however. In the several years that I've been playing with this GM, he has always ran a pre-made module. (I use the word "always" literally. I've never, ever played in even a 1-shot with him that wasn't a module he either purchased or found online.) This game /might/ be an exception. He doesn't keep any papers near him, which is very different than every other game he's ran. He normally has the module by his side and throws away papers as he finishes with the page, but with this campaign, he's not done that. However, one of the players says that he played Warhammer with this GM a long time ago and that he feels like this is similar, perhaps identical, to the campaign he played in all those years ago. So it could very well be that the GM has a module tucked away and he's been following it as well as he can. He already kind of railroaded us once when we said we wanted to do another thing and he just kept assuming in a "I'm pretending that I'm not hearing you" sort of way that we wanted to do something else. We just sort of went with it, because it's not really a big difference to us, though from the story perspective, if he had one way planned and we went another way, then it would change a lot of things.

All that was a very long-winded way of saying, "That is a highly plausible explanation."

He also tends to look at games as him vs the players (while my own GM style is me WITH the players, celebrating their victories with them, though I'm not about to make it easy), so it could just be that he wants to "win". Possibly.

Anyway, a big thank you to those who replied. R_b for clarifying the rules and Ralz and Abidab for the friendly advise.

One more question, if someone's up for it. Based on what you read with the rules discrepancies, how different is a "follows the rules strictly" game versus what we are playing? I feel like I really want to try out a game without any house-rules to see how deadly and fun the system can be on its own merits.

Hi,

I think a game RAW would be considerably more dangerous in combat than the rules your GM is using, specifically the fortune points. The armour and combat difficulty rules are also probably keeping your pcs a little too safe for my liking... ;)

Just a thought but if you feel your GM is running the adventures in a little too dictatorial fashion and is also good friends with the group, it may be worth having a chat and asking him for a loose session every now and then, without a strict plan, just to see where the story goes. Give him and the players a chance to "wing it" a bit more and see if its something that works for the group?

First, I must preface this with the fact that WFRP is designed to be flexible and for the GM to tell a story. Thus, the GM is "always right", in the fact that he is allowed, per the rules, to alter or modify just about anything and everything to fit the story his is telling.


Now, it is also possible that the GM is misunderstanding the rules presented in the rulebooks, rather that the changes being a deliberate house rule.


1.) Yes, the minimum damage on a hit is 1 wound. However, piercing attacks ignore soak. Skeletons simply ignore criticals. Piercing attacks have nothing to do with skeletons (unless they are wearing armor!). It sounds like the GM is applying a D&D penalty for 'piercing' weapons to skeletons. It is not something in the WFRP rules, but might be an intentional affect/house rule the GM wishes to use.


2) No, you do not gain any skills for free when you go into them after creation. A character who manages to transition from one career into, say, an Apprentice Wizard, will need to spend XP to learn Channeling and Spellcraft in order to cast spells.


3) Yes and no. The default is 1d (purple) for combat. However, the rules do specifically mention that combat the GM could run combat as opposed tests, which essentially work as you described.


4) No, there is no stacking of armor soak values. Shields (not considered armor) will stack, and there might be other sources of soak that might stack. Personally, most characters won't be strong enough to be able to wear two suits of armor, while carrying weapons and other gear.


5)

5a) "Engaged" range is 'close enough to whisper'. It is possible, but highly unlikely, to be engaged with an ally but not engaged with an opponent who is engaged with that same ally. Essentially, "Engagement" areas will be created during combat, and generally if you engage with one character in an engagement, you engage with all characters in that engagement.

5b) There are no 'Attacks of Opportunity' in WFRP. The mention in the rulebook has been explained merely as a fluff reason why a character *must* spend a maneuver to disengage from opponents. It is not an actual attack, though. Again, it seems like your GM is getting confused or using rules from D&D.

5c) You engage everyone in the engagement, generally. To give an example, in a tight space you might only be able to fight single-file. Thus, you might only be able to 'engage' someone to your front and to your back. In this particular instance, then yes, you could be engaged with the ally in front of you, but not engaged with an opponent in front of them, since you have no ability to attack them in melee (and vice versa).


6) No such rule. FP are used to add a white die to a roll, or potentially to trigger effects (such as BYF). However, it also sounds like your GM is misunderstanding how the party cards works. Party cards do not contain actual FP, and cannot be used. The Pool is used to allocate 'points', for things like good roleplaying, and when the number of points equals the number of players, each player receives a FP. Before then, those tokens are not usable as FP by anyone.


8) Yes. FP can be spent after you have rolled other dice. You only have 3 FP ever at a time, and they recover fairly slowly.


9) Diseases and insanities and corruption are somewhat advanced topics, so your GM might be avoiding them.


10) Yes.


11) There is a limit. You can only train a skill once for every character Rank. So, 0-9 XP skills are limited to 1 rank of training (1 yellow die), 10-19 xp the limit increases to 2 ranks in a skill, etc. Again, it might just be your GM misunderstanding the rules.


12) Pretty much, yes.


13) You spend an 11th XP to get the dedication bonus.


14) No. Only if the action has a test of "VS" something, does it have a default difficulty.


15) No. Only if the action has a test of "VS" something, does it have a default difficulty. Otherwise, the only difficulty is based on the icons printed on the card itself. Some spells/cards will show black squares or purple gems indicating that they have an increased difficulty. Otherwise, if neither "vs" nor an icon is present, the difficulty is 0.


16) Probably, yes. In general, the 'active' player (usually the PC) is the one who actually rolls. You compare the relevant stats/skills. The difficulty is determined by the difference between the two.

Active character > twice opponent = 0d (purple)

Active character > opponent = 1d (purple)

Active character == opponent = 2d (purple)

Opponent > active character = 3d (purple)

opponent twice or more active character = 4d (purple)

Edited by dvang

8) Yes. FP can be spent after you have rolled other dice.

Not correct, I'm afraid. Page 14 of the core set main rulebook (and page 18 of the Player's Guide) specifically states that Fortune Points must be spent before any dice are rolled.

Edited by r_b_bergstrom

1.) Yes, the minimum damage on a hit is 1 wound. However, piercing attacks ignore soak. Skeletons simply ignore criticals. Piercing attacks have nothing to do with skeletons (unless they are wearing armor!). It sounds like the GM is applying a D&D penalty for 'piercing' weapons to skeletons. It is not something in the WFRP rules, but might be an intentional affect/house rule the GM wishes to use.
16) Probably, yes. In general, the 'active' player (usually the PC) is the one who actually rolls. You compare the relevant stats/skills. The difficulty is determined by the difference between the two.
Active character > twice opponent = 0d (purple)
Active character > opponent = 1d (purple)
Active character == opponent = 2d (purple)
Opponent > active character = 3d (purple)
opponent twice or more active character = 4d (purple)

First of all, thank you for the in-depth answer to all of the questions.

I actually had no idea about the bolded part of #1. This means we've been doing it very wrong. (Surprise, surprise!)

Are arrows considered piercing? (I would assume so.) And, where can I find the rule concerning piercing attacks ignoring soak? Ditto for #16. Where can I find the rules for that? I'd like to read up more on both.

I'm feeling a bit weird about all the things we are doing incorrectly. I was just reading over the rulebook again and discovered that we are doing our advancements incorrectly. I thought that the things listed on the advancement card were all you could purchase for a career. So, for example, the Scribe has Wound 0. So I thought I couldn't purchase any wounds without going out-of-career for 2 points. This also confused me, because there are the "open advancement slots" and the 4 that are already marked on the sheet, where wound is one of them. As it turns out, you are required to purchase all 4 of those that are there, then the rest of the ones on the sheet are all optional advances, and this is where you spend to get a stat boost. So my character is illegal in yet another way as I didn't spend my advancements properly. I purchased Willpower 4 and used up at least 2 (and maybe 3) of the "mandatory" spots to do it, because how can they be mandatory if they clearly aren't even possible for me to buy? (Wound being the obvious point here.) And yeah, I get it now, we've just been doing it wrong.

The part that frustrates me is that I was the rules expert when we did D&D for years and years. I'm not the kind of guy that corrects things at the table. I make a note of it when we mess up something and I approach the DM about it after the game. If it's intentional - great. It's something that I want to know about. If it was an accident, then I can refer him to the proper book/page and we'd fix it for the next time. But, despite the fact that I handle these things as delicately as I can, I still don't enjoy doing it. So I really don't want to take up the mantle for WH. I'd rather someone else do that.

However, I'm finding myself in a weird spot. I'm really enjoying the game ... but the other players aren't feeling this new system. My wife has already stopped playing (she just comes after for the other games we play), another weekly guy dislikes it, and the other core players are rather "meh" about it. One guy, who is not a regular but he is a huge Warhammer universe fan (mostly miniatures), joined us for one session. While he's not the biggest into RPG's, he does play things like GURPS, Savage Worlds, and Firefly, so he's not inexperienced at rpgs. This was his first go at the RPG version of Warhammer, and he hated the system despite knowing the world far better than the rest of us.

I've spoken with the players who dislike the system in an attempt to figure out what it is they dislike about it. I'm hoping it's the rules and that fixing those would allow us to see it for the system its designed to be, but without playing in a game without house-rules, there's no way for me to really know. After all, I don't know what the game would be like when played properly. I've never played it properly, either.

(Sorry about the rant. This got away from me. I even deleted a few paragraphs.)

Are arrows considered piercing? (I would assume so.) And, where can I find the rule concerning piercing attacks ignoring soak? Ditto for #16. Where can I find the rules for that? I'd like to read up more on both.

Page 74 of the core rulebook has the rules for pierce, page 76 lists the ranged weapons. There you'll find that black powder weapons have pierce, and so does the longbow but not the short bow or any of the crossbows.

As for opposed checks, the relevant rules are found on pages 42 & 43 of the core rulebook.

Edited by herrquisling

> Yes, the minimum damage on a hit is 1 wound. However, piercing attacks ignore soak. Skeletons simply ignore criticals. Piercing attacks have nothing to do with skeletons (unless they are wearing armor!).

I actually had no idea about the bolded part of #1. This means we've been doing it very wrong. (Surprise, surprise!)

Are arrows considered piercing? (I would assume so.) And, where can I find the rule concerning piercing attacks ignoring soak? Ditto for #16. Where can I find the rules for that? I'd like to read up more on both.

"Pierce" is a special quality some (ranged) weapons have. It doesn't make them ignore all soak, just a point or two. If a weapon has Pierce: 1 (such as a longbow or a pistol), that means its attacks treat the armor of the target as if that armor had one less point of soak. Out-of-the-box, default by-the-books skeletons have 1 point of armour soak, which would be cancelled by the Pierce quality. Meaning that a longbow per the rules does more damage to skeletons than a hand weapon would.