New topic started

There is very little I would want to change except core books that don't disintegrate in your hands, a lighter, simpler graphic style; the books, cards etc are visually cluttered and very dark ( they probably look great on the designer/artists computer screen but not when printed) and clearer tokens for stress/fatigue/power etc. Perhaps a rules summery or flow diagram and an index. I love the dice though wonder if you could streamline the black and purple dice into one?

After playing through the last legs of The Enemy Within I have to say that the system breaks down, probably around level 3. Too many dice and too many talents to keep track of. If they keep the system more or less as is I hope they could have a characther builder/card tracker/dice roller app for iPad/Android/Windows. It would probably need to have som in-app buys for card packs etc but it would be a significant time-saver and if it could add/subtract the symbols like the Star Wars dice app it would be great.

To me what kills this game are the talents and the action cards: the dices alone, in a more free system it would be better.

This edition has tried too much to imitate D&D and it failed.

I like the special actions . Their absence was what made 2e lame IMO in comparison. I don't disagree that they tried to imitate 4th edition D&D with their special actions mechanic.

I'm not a fan of the Star Wars dice because I consider it just unnecessary paperwork/accounting to have endless dice rolls with endless modifiers, but with no actual references. It took the excellent dice system and made it completely lame and sterile.

I could care less about stance, but the special actions make the variable dice worthwhile. It wouldn't/isn't hard to play this game without the special actions (one of my players does that with just the basic actions).

Other main crap that could go:

* all those stupid variable defenses for a SINGLE BLACK DIE (one thing SW got right was to remove these)

* talent socketing (I hate SW's D&D-style talent trees)

* party sheets as punishment and GM paternalism

One thing that should stay and be playtested more:
* Social effects (it keeps characters cool beyond how much they can whack)

In the end..it doesn't really matter though. This game is in license purgatory.

I like pretty much all of it.

Main issues are exectuion. Some of it is physically not well executed (standups artwork often cluttered etc., location cards sepia not vibrant on a table) or edited well (rules boks, duplicative Creature Guide info), but the only rule thing I think really tanks is the party card (good idea, badly executed). Stance is middling, idea nice, how some actions vary by stance nice, dice variation good, but it should actually "matter or be felt more" somehow, even if just naming the actions more colourly by stance side "Desperate/Angry/Furious/Reckless..." vs "Careful/Measured/Considered/Cautious...."

Those are all small gripes against the system's strengths - narratively helpful dicepool system, the "decks not percentile tables" approach to crits and miscasts etc. that put variabilty into game without slowing it down, the general balance of "no resurrection" with "actually hard to die just with one badk roll".

I hope the next edition will be card optional. I prefer to use pdfs, and it is a pain that the pdfs don't come with the cards. What do you do; buy the physical box and the pdf. The cards should be optional reference aids.

What a thread!
Who has dared to resurrect this monster??

If the next edition has to be brought to life by FFG, I will like it to be ike the new Star Wars game. Way smaller dice pools, no MMORPG like recharge mechanic, skill descriptions with ideas on how to spend the different symbols, fleshed NPCs with skills and equipment, an extensive equipment list, a few conditions (stunned, disoriented...) with rules on how they may appear, rules for environmental damage, rules for damaging equipment.

If one thing has to go is talents and talent trees, waaay too much D&D style power crawling thing.
New things I will like is a decent system for social conflict (TOR, Burning Wheel), and some real narrative mechanics like the traits in TOR, or aspects in FATE, or the BITs in Burning Wheel. The new Star Wars did only a shy approach to this with the destiny points. Better than nothing of course!

Yepes

Yepes.

What are these Talent tree's you speak of?

I hear this a bit, but I am still unsure what you guys consider "talent tree's" in WFRP. Do you mean dice and Mastery? the combat styles such as Destrio and Zeiweihander?

The focussed approach in the Wizard and Priest advancement?

I agree too on the "recharge" mechanic. I probably wouldn't mind the defense system if it wasn't such petty accounting for essentially at 5% difference every other round. The recharge does encourage players to use some different actions rather than repeated reckless cleave..but still..combat must be made interesting through mechanics for many people.

Anyways, the talent trees would be like this: You cannot take certain talents until you've taken weaker talents. The talent "power" then ramps up and power of the campaign ramps up (D&D style).

In D&D, an example of a "tree" is this:

Power attack --> Cleave --> Great Cleave --> Superior cleave --> Enormous-cleave-kill-all-monsters-cleave

The advantages of trees are that you can power up.

The disadvantages of trees is that you power up a campaign..you've got halflings fighting epic dragons toe to toe without the blink of an eye. You also have all kinds of crap that never gets used..b/c most campaigns never make it past a mid-level point. Hence, you've got enormous books full of spells & powers that only 5% of players are ever going to use and meanwhile you've got not enough stuff for the regular guys (kind of like our situation in WFRP without the Thief's Tomb supplment that was promised (back to 2e).

I agree with Yepes that SW would be a great place to start. What I particularly like is that the characters start with an average of a point less in all their characteristics than in WFRP 3rd. Increasing your characteristics after that is also part of the talent tree of your profession, so how you assign your charcteristics at the start is doubly important. Talent trees I suspect are going to need to be a given. Whether they are based on profession or just a general talent tree so that you cannot buy trollfeller strike until you gave bought at least three other talents in progression.

Ragnar.

How is this any different from how things work now?

I don't think we need "talent tree's" as say what you would see in WOW or SW:TOR, or even the D&D one Emrikol showed. Do I think that talents (encompassing talents and action cards here) should have room for improvement? YES. Here is the tricky bit, I ALSO feel that just because you have "improved X" you should not be forced to totally replace the previous action.

Just because I can be "advanced" at dodging, does not mean I somehow forget how to just dodge. I could "just dodge" because I have the stat, or use it because I am co-ord trained for the extra black dice, or I don't want to waste a purple on a minion strike.

Perhaps the advanced actions could have a re-charge, but the basic actions do not if you have the advanced version?

Ragnar.

How is this any different from how things work now?

Hi Carcosa.

One thing we want to get away from is the problem with recharging. Talent trees will also go "back" to the 1st and 2nd edition concept where your profession limited what talents ("cards") you could acquire. It will make the professions stronger again as they were very much less "interesting" than under 1st or 2nd edition, particularly after the first career.

Ragnar

Why is a "cool down" or "recharge" wrong?

I mean, isn't playing the same action over and over again equally as boring, and makes the earlier actions just a comical waste?

I swing my sword!!

R2= I swing my sword, but with +1 damage!!

R3 = I swing my sword, but with +2 damage!!

My rank 3 toon has around 8 odd different -bought- actions, and 7 of them are Melee actions and they are only worth having because of the cooldowns, OR the occasional situation.

I honestly don't see how 2nd+ professions are any less of a stat/skill mine than they are in 3rd Ed however.

Ragnar

Why is a "cool down" or "recharge" wrong?

I mean, isn't playing the same action over and over again equally as boring, and makes the earlier actions just a comical waste?

These are only my opinions:

1) A recharge mechanic is a poor mechanic in an RPG. It may suit a computer game where balance is a must, but not an RPG. There is no justification for it. Why my PC cannot attack in two consecutive rounds with his double strike? Why I cannot parry in two consecutive turns? Instead of a plain recharge mechanic, the action cards should have something that interacts with the character, may be giving him fatigue, or the risk of getting a certain condition with banes, or damaging the equipment (unstringing the bow, dropping the weapon... ).

2) Tons of action cards with nice drawings don't make combats more interesting to me. The setting, the enemies, the goals and the danger of the situation is what makes a combat interesting. I play games like The One Ring, Ars Magica, Shadows of Esteren, The Burning Wheel, where you "only swing your sword" over and over again. What makes combat interesting is knowing that your PCs live is at stakes, that you have to accomplish a certain goal etc. A meaningless combat, a combat for a combat, is boring no matter how many action cards you have, at least to me.

Let me clarify that I am not against action cards (although Warhammer 3 has way too many action cards which are useless), there are many RPGs that use actions (Warhammer 2 did for example, poorly, but it did).

I quite like the recharge mechanic myself - especially as it can limit the tougher NPC actions and provides players with choice rather than always hitting with their hardest attack.

Yepes.

Point 1:

What you are suggesting is nothing more than a reskinned recharge mechanic. "Oh, you can do X every round, until you get too much stress/fatigue from it so you have to recharge those resources instead of the action. Point being, it is still a recharge, just on a broader platform. All that allows for is micro-managing your resources

Point 2:

I agree, I want my combats to mean something within the story besides "Pc's enter room B6 and face 6 goblins" I also want them to be more than just boring dice rolls till the Pc's win

I'm finding that Star Wars falls apart after 400 xp in the same manner that WFRP falls apart at Rank 3. Aside from aesthetics I no longer see much difference under the hood.

This thread being pulled back up is.... something

Cheers

I quite like the recharge mechanic myself - especially as it can limit the tougher NPC actions and provides players with choice rather than always hitting with their hardest attack.

The recharge mechanics do not provide choices, it forces characters to alternate actions with no reason. Providing choices is something else, like given a certain situation, you can choose the best course of action. I have two opponents, what should I do? or I am tired, which is the best action I can use, or etc...

I quite like the recharge mechanic myself - especially as it can limit the tougher NPC actions and provides players with choice rather than always hitting with their hardest attack.

The recharge mechanics do not provide choices, it forces characters to alternate actions with no reason. Providing choices is something else, like given a certain situation, you can choose the best course of action. I have two opponents, what should I do? or I am tired, which is the best action I can use, or etc...

Without that "forced decision" though aren't you going to just find the optimal solution and spam it? It seems likely that most 3.5-era players would. I feel like the recharge mechanic encourages diversity. Without recharge Star Wars suffers from this with talents since many are basically boost or setback modifications. My Star Wars group is playing their talent trees and characters like an MMO, where my Warhammer group is more tactical and narrative. Do decisions matter? That's the deal.

I quite like the recharge mechanic myself - especially as it can limit the tougher NPC actions and provides players with choice rather than always hitting with their hardest attack.

The recharge mechanics do not provide choices, it forces characters to alternate actions with no reason. Providing choices is something else, like given a certain situation, you can choose the best course of action. I have two opponents, what should I do? or I am tired, which is the best action I can use, or etc...

Without that "forced decision" though aren't you going to just find the optimal solution and spam it? It seems likely that most 3.5-era players would. I feel like the recharge mechanic encourages diversity. Without recharge Star Wars suffers from this with talents since many are basically boost or setback modifications. My Star Wars group is playing their talent trees and characters like an MMO, where my Warhammer group is more tactical and narrative. Do decisions matter? That's the deal.

I agree, I like recharge.

Even if it's forcing the choice on the players it still gives combat more variation than in most other RPGs. Also, if you did exactly the same attack over and over again in a "real" combat, even if it was your strongest swing, it would be pretty easy to counter your attacks.

That's a good point.

Leave the recharge mechanism away, but if a charater plays the same action against the same opponent, give him misfortune dice to reflect this.

if they were to keep to the same sort of design as edge of the empire then im ok with that aslong as theres no cards, theres no need to be having aload of cards in a roleplay, the thing i loved about 2nd edition and why my group still plays and loves it is the careers thats all you need, personaly id like them to go more towards 2nd edition and just d100

I would like to see the star wars approach but I fear we would lose all the careers that has made warhammer special.

if they were to keep to the same sort of design as edge of the empire then im ok with that aslong as theres no cards, theres no need to be having aload of cards in a roleplay, the thing i loved about 2nd edition and why my group still plays and loves it is the careers thats all you need, personaly id like them to go more towards 2nd edition and just d100

Meh, sounds boring as hell. I played 2nd editon as well, and i hated the oversimplefied and d100 system. It was just boring.

The reason why i enjoy 3rd edition is, because... well it is different, and without the cards and bits and stuff the 3rd edition of WFRP would be like any other roleplay game. If they would scratch all that, the markers, cards and what not, i would just get straight into another system like D&D, DSA, Shadowrun because all of them are by far better when it comes to fluff/adventures/expansions and in general stuff to read.