Jump to content



Photo

A roleplayer's rant


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#41 TylerT

TylerT

    Member

  • Members
  • 168 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 05:27 AM

The cards, tokens, and sheets in this set are all things that have been missing from every RPG since they stopped doing really slick box sets.

What you dont realise is this whole time you have been playing 3.5 or countless other systems is that classes, feats, talents, weapons, edges, Disadvantages are all information that should have been on a card this whole time.

So you have a card that outlines the rules for making an attack, does that make it any easer of a "character choice" to resort to violence?

 



#42 Necrozius

Necrozius

    Member

  • Members
  • 947 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 05:36 AM

In Dark Heresy (and to an extent, WFRP 2.0), some combat has been as complicated as this:

PC wants to attack an Orc

PC has already suffered a critical hit from earlier (blood in his eyes), so he gets -10 to his attack roll

PC has higher ground than the Orc, so he gets +10 to his attack roll

PC is attacking defensively, incurring a -10 penalty to his attack roll

PC is standing in thigh deep snow, incurring another -10 penalty to his attack roll

The orc is being flanked by another PC, so the attacker gets a +10 bonus to his attack roll.

Half of those rules had to be checked out in the rulebook to make sure. Luckily, I made a quick reference table outlining these bonuses and penalties.

Even then, some quick math had to be done- at 11PM, already a bit drunk, this took a second or two to figure out. God forbid someone else mentioned another modifier we hadn't included yet.

If these new dice will make it as simple as adding a "danger die" to the attack dice pool for every complication or penalty mentioned above, it could potentially speed up gameplay quite a bit.



#43 ChaosChild

ChaosChild

    Member

  • Members
  • 526 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 05:59 AM

Varnias Tybalt said:

VonMoose said:

 

Dont worry; im sure we can convert any new material to 2nd ed :D

 

 

That's the DYI-spirit I like to see in roleplayers! 

So what if the next edition will be in a new type of format? If there new things are released for it, just convert it to the edition you like the most and be happy about it. Instead of moaning and bashing and acting like it's the end of the world like some here have done.

Because some of us have to work for a living and don't have the time to convert everything to a set of rules we're comfortable with. Especially when the rules changes are a extreme as they are in this case.

Some of us are also extremely grateful for pre-written adventures (even ones with as many problems as TTT) with pre-generated characters, at least as a framework to build on, because otherwise there simply wouldn't be enough time to prep everything before the next session.

So some of us are extremely disappointed that we won't be getting anything more in this vein, effectively curtailing our enjoyment of one of the finest RPGs available.



#44 sudden real

sudden real

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 06:05 AM

I think you guys are going about this the wrong way.

The way I see it, you roll a number of dice (in v2 a D100), with certain (mis)fortune dice added because of circumstances (in v2 a -10/+10 modifier), and you explain the result based on the outcome of the roll (meaning you don't just make stuff up (no pun intended) to say how you succeeded, since everything was there in the first place and was added to the roll).

So, in the end, if you roleplayed the barely success of a test in v2 (a role that would have been a total failure if it hadn't been for that +20 modifier), I see no reason why you can't do it now.

As for damage being greater with more hammers or eagles or whatever, no, that's not the narrative or RP aspect. That's LISTENING to the fans! Check the v2 board and you'll see lots of fans making up houserules that base damage on the degrees of success. They just made that official.



#45 Jericho

Jericho

    Member

  • Members
  • 376 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 06:06 AM

DagobahDave said:

vyrago said:

"you must spend a half-action to free your blade or switch weapons."

 

Those are kind of meta-descriptors, too -- half-action, switch weapon (which would involve a free action). See what I mean? You're using rules and game terminology to help tell a story.

Same thing in WFRP3. And you'll be using most of the same terms from earlier editions. (Probably not half-actions, though.) Attributes are almost all the same. Skills look like they're about the same, and used in very much the same way. You have careers and gradually get better in them. The GM is in control of the story, from everything that I've seen.

DagobahDave said:

vyrago said:

"you must spend a half-action to free your blade or switch weapons."

 

Those are kind of meta-descriptors, too -- half-action, switch weapon (which would involve a free action). See what I mean? You're using rules and game terminology to help tell a story.

 

I hate that metalanguage. V1 had less than v2 and was better on that aspect for it.

If V3 can reduce the use of metalanguage around the table, I'll love it.


———
The time of change has come!

#46 Jericho

Jericho

    Member

  • Members
  • 376 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 06:18 AM

vyrago said:

 im betting its all self contained within your turn and you can do about 7 different things either cautiously or recklessly.  Im gonna guess Charge,Melee Attack, Ranged Attack, Manuever, Cast Spell, Use Item and Dodge. 

 

What about "use skill", it's bound to be there, as in v2.

Use your Intimidate skill to taunt the fellah, and then delay an attack to gain initiative when he approaches.

I would be surprised if this isn't possible in V3.

Personnally, I like the idea of having multiple results related to which dice were used that mac21 described.

As GM, it will help me devise a good description that is actually tied to what mechanically happened. It makes my job easier.

(In my game, I like to go over results and add flavor and secondary effects using the DoS and DoF as guide. Only that way, fumbles only happen on a missed roll. If I had a fumble on a success, players will say I'm picking on them ! :) )


———
The time of change has come!

#47 Jericho

Jericho

    Member

  • Members
  • 376 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 06:24 AM

Poe said:

Basically it tells you what modifier or ability actually make you succeed or fail. Of course, you're completely free to ignore this extra spice, or just make up your own reasons. But I actually think that for a lot of people it'll be a cool little mechanic. The group I'm playing with usually don't have any trouble coming up with colourful descriptions for their actions, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't welcome some extra material to work with.

Or, if it's really not your cup of tea, you could ignore it completely; which is how V2 works at the moment. You just lump together all the modifiers and get a single result instead of seeing how the different modifiers actually interact and create a situation.

I agree. I actually do it already if, for example, someone barely makes a roll that I had given a +20% bonus to, I'll describe the favorable conditions as being the determining factor in the outcome. Having more "info" about what made the difference in the end is interesting for describing the action.


———
The time of change has come!

#48 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 07:18 AM

Foolishboy said:

 

 

 

Have you ever been in a debate before?

vyrago has put forward his opinion and then thrown down the challenge of proving him wrong, opening the forum to present counter arguments.

That's how a debate goes, one side lays out an argument the other side makes a counter argument. If no counter argument is forthcoming then "silence denotes acceptance" comes into play. If nobody posts a counter argument vyrago wins the debate by default if nothing else.  

 

 

Arguments are fine and dandy but in order to PROVE someone wrong you need... *drumroll* PROOF!

Since the game hasn't even been released yet and only a small portion of aspects and details that MIGHT be included in it (we have no idea what FFG might decide to include or scrap of the stuff revealed so far), it is IMPOSSIBLE to present anything in the form of proof.

While arguments do hold the ability to CONVINCE someone into changing  opinion, arguments alone can never PROVE anyone wrong or right without proof.

If you're going to try correcting someone, do it right before writing...



#49 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 07:23 AM

ChaosChild said:

 

 

Because some of us have to work for a living and don't have the time to convert everything to a set of rules we're comfortable with.

Are you implying that I and other DIY-enthusiasts DON'T work for a living?

Mind sharing what you base those assumptions on?

Like ny working person I assume you have spare time as well? (I mean you seem to have the time playing RPG's so it's logical to assume that you don't work 24/7).

It's all about prioritising your spare time, if you don't feel like doing the proper conversions then that's your perogative. And if you feel disappointed over the fact that someone else won't do that work for you, then that's your prerogative as well.

But there is a limit to how much moaning in disappointment a person can justifiably do, and that limit has been overstepped countless times in this particular forum...



#50 vyrago

vyrago

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 07:24 AM

As I understand it, there are those who have already seen this game in action at Gen Con and been to seminars held by FFG.  I wont comment on the playtesters since I know they are bound by an NDA.  but seriously, what is all the secrecy about? 



#51 DagobahDave

DagobahDave

    Laser Brain

  • Members
  • 1,069 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 08:13 AM

vyrago said:

 

As I understand it, there are those who have already seen this game in action at Gen Con and been to seminars held by FFG.  I wont comment on the playtesters since I know they are bound by an NDA.  but seriously, what is all the secrecy about? 

 

 

I think it was just a presentation, not a working demonstration. But Jay wrote that he's working on designer diaries and previews to show us what's up. I think he's gonna need an asbestos keyboard, no matter what he tells us.


Join the Unofficial X-Wing Galactic Campaign and propel your favorite faction toward victory every time you play!

 


#52 MagnusSeter

MagnusSeter

    Member

  • Members
  • 64 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 10:14 AM

vyrago said:

I've been playing RPGs for nearly 20 years now.  I guess i'm what you call old school.  I've played through an entire gaming store worth of RPGs and even created one or two homebrew systems.  I'm reacting to the recent announcement of 3rd edition Warhammer in this post. 

I've been playing RPGs for 27 years. I've played WFRP since the day it was released. I own basically an entire gaming store worth of RPGs. I've written a published roleplaying game, and worked on several others. I've released quite a lot of very high quality WFRP fan material, for both editions.

And you know what?

That doesn't make anything I say about the game any more an absolute truth or more correct than what anyone else is saying. It doesn't make me a representative of the old guard, or the hard core WFRP fan base, or any other group.

I don't have a magical "I am right, you are wrong" card to play, regardless of how long I've played, how much I've written, or how many games I own. I can only speak for myself, and I believe that if more people did that, the debate here would be a lot less acrimonous.

And what I'm feeling right now is part excitement, part apprehension. This could be a very cool version of WFRP, or it could be game that does not appeal to me.

It could actually be both things at the same time.

/Magnus

 



#53 vyrago

vyrago

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 12:26 PM

Which is alot like I feel about D&D 4e.  I was exited but aprehensive, in the end there are some things which are good ideas (such as more powerful wizards, simple spells as 'powers' and re-training) and some thing which were big turn-offs.  (like all the meta-gaming involved with the powers and magic items.)  Does it play ok?  sure.  Is it still D&D?  yeah.  But its gamist, too crunchy and immature.  Im starting to see 3e going that way too.  I'm sure it will have great artwork, good presentation, fine editing and even fun to play a few times.  but real roleplayers will probably start to feel like theyre on rails.  true roleplaying games are tedious and plodding.  they take hours of preparation, hours to play and often you end up going way 'off script'.  This new generation of RPGs are streamlined for ease of play, and theyre not really lying.  less preparation, faster table play (often shorter game sessions) and more adhesion to the adventure path.  From my own experience I've always found the most immersive RPGs were usually rules lite such as WFRP 2e or Heavy Gear (silcore).  one type of dice, a short list of modifiers and a basic resolution mechanic.  Perhaps this is a bad metaphor, but WFRP 3e is starting to seem like a RPG Nickelback compared to 2nd edition Metallica.  (while 1st edition was Black Sabbath!)

 

 



#54 TylerT

TylerT

    Member

  • Members
  • 168 posts

Posted 18 August 2009 - 01:27 PM

vyrago said:

 

true roleplaying games are tedious and plodding.  they take hours of preparation, hours to play and often you end up going way 'off script'.

 

 

 

That right there is the biggest example that something about your RPGs needs to change. In the short time that I have been playing indie RPG's (prime time adventures, ocean) it has shown me that one, rpg's do not need to take any time to prepare and two, you never go off script if you don't start with one. If your really looking to role play I suggest picking up either of the games I previously mentioned.

 



#55 HedgeWizard

HedgeWizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 532 posts

Posted 19 August 2009 - 07:23 AM

 This almost 30-year long RPG player thinks your blanket statement that "old school RPG  players will be repulsed by this game" is way too hyperbolic.  I think plenty of "old school" players will like it, plenty won't. 

You suggest that someone "prove you wrong."  I submit that it's no one's job to prove you wrong. Rather it is your job to investigate the premises and decide for yourself. 

It's one thing to open a thread to ask questions, raise debates and discuss. It's another to throw a litany of complaints against the wall and demanding that someone justify their decisions.

It's okay to ask questions and raise concerns about decisions, but the difference is one of tone and a sincere interest to hear what the other side says. 



#56 GreyLord

GreyLord

    Member

  • Members
  • 110 posts

Posted 19 August 2009 - 05:27 PM

macd21 said:

"The dice help tell the story" thing seems to be just a case of bad marketing on FFG's part. What they mean is that you can, if you so choose, look at the results on the dice and concoct a story around it. This isn't much different from any RPG with dice (I got a 20 to hit!!! My axe slashes into the monster's hide, spilling his guts onto the floor), but 3ed adds the fact that you can tell what factors influenced the results. For example, Grognar the trollslayer charges the enemy recklessly over dangerous terrain. He rolls his ability dice (2 successes), his reckless dice (1 chaos symbol) and two misfortune dice (1 chaos symbol). Result: a basic hit, but the enemy gets a free attack on him. Looking at the dice, the player desides that Grognars mad charge through the bushes caused him to trip and stumble into the Orc leaving him vulnerable to it's blade, but he manages to maintain enough control to connect his axe to the greenskin's thigh. Had the reckless dice been a success instead of a chaos symbol, he would have scored a critical hit. He could have then described Grognards reckless leap through the bushes, catching the Orc by surprise and smashing his skull in.

 

Yes, that's how I would say the dice are going to be used.  I of course also think it's a boardgame idea taken from other boardgames that already have these dynamics...BUT...I'd say that this is how the dice work and what they meant by the rolls aiding in the story telling.  For example, you have dice that are given to you under certain conditions, and may be dependant on what you do.  So let's say you normally have a WS of 3, but you are also given the intiative, as well as having the winds of fate blowing your way and you also have the spellcaster spell giving you a bonus so you actually roll 7 dice.  Now you may miss completely with your weaponskill dice, but the winds of fate may indicate a hit...so if your GM wants to, he can interpret it that way.



#57 GreyLord

GreyLord

    Member

  • Members
  • 110 posts

Posted 19 August 2009 - 05:37 PM

DagobahDave said:

Dagobah Dave said:

Why would anyone design a big-name, big-budget, must-succeed game that would be full of such obviously poor design choices? I mean, those would be horrible choices. Awful.

http://www.wizards.c...p?x=dnd/welcome

[sarcasm on]

Wow, OD&D, D&D, AD&D, all by TSR really killed the industry

and now by the above linked page...

4e seems to have lost them the entire RPG industry...WOW!!!

[/sarcasm off]

 

Actually though, I thought you were ALL FOR this new system...weren't you?

You've been singing enough praises to it that I thought I could sell you beach front property in the middle of the Sahara if I just called it WFRP v4 and mentioned a that it would be grim and dirty as well as having new dice and a new dynamic.

And from what I see, this new system is going to have similar, as you put it..."obviously poor design choices? I mean, those would be horrible choices." as per your statement.

Hmmm, interesting.



#58 GreyLord

GreyLord

    Member

  • Members
  • 110 posts

Posted 19 August 2009 - 05:41 PM

Poe said:

Hellebore said:

 

i think the limit is seen in the fact that the more things are codified, the less freedom you have to choose what happens. If the rules offer 5 pieces of official flavour text, then people stick with that. It's sort of funny but the more you help people the less they end up doing off their own bat. 

 

 

 

Well, I see what you mean, but the coin has two sides. I tried playing Dark Heresy with a group of players who didn't have much experience with roleplaying. They did pretty well overall but they often struggled with coming up  with imaginery descriptions for their actions and I think a system like this would have given them that little extra help needed. As for old rpg veterans like us I think it would be easy enough to just ignore the specifics of the dots and just see how many you get. For me personally, it seems like a good mechanic to add some extra flavour.

 

The biggest reason that I'm positively inclined towards V3 is actually FFGs track record. I've been playing their games for many years before they acquired the GW license and I think they turn out top-notch products. What I've seen so far of V3 certainly looks interesting, but it's mainly my faith in FFG that keeps me from (hopefully) unnecessary worrying.

 

IF I actually even start thinking about getting v3 (that a big IF at this point) the above reason would be one of the BIGGEST factors.  That and if they make it a board game, so it appeals to the boardgamer in me, stop this hybrid stuff and just make it a boardgame.  OF course, then there may be violent rebellion.  I'd mock it and truly get in arms that it wasn't an WFRP at all, even in an illusion...but I'd buy the boardgame.

I would say FFG is one of the most talented and resourceful companies for their products which they've come out with.  Even the small niche stuff like Midnight, is absolutely outstanding in the fluff.

Though I'm absolutely horrid at what they are doing with WFRP at the present, the above would be the ONLY real reasons for me buckling and getting this new, and atrociously outrageously expensive whatever you may call it WFRP thingy.



#59 vyrago

vyrago

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 19 August 2009 - 08:53 PM

HedgeWizard said:

You suggest that someone "prove you wrong."  I submit that it's no one's job to prove you wrong. Rather it is your job to investigate the premises and decide for yourself. 

 

I'm sorry, I'll just re-word my entire first post.  Here goes.  *ahem*

 

I think it will suck.  do you think it will suck? 

 

 

:)

 

 



#60 Ye Ancient One

Ye Ancient One

    Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 19 August 2009 - 09:03 PM

vyrago said:

I think it will suck.  do you think it will suck?

I think it will be fab.  Now let's settle this like gentlemen!  <silk glove cheek slap>






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS