Jump to content



Photo

WFRP 4e - how should it look?


  • Please log in to reply
325 replies to this topic

#41 madpoet

madpoet

    Member

  • Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 03:28 AM

They could change the system but I think they should try to incorporate the materials created for WFRP3.

First of all dice and action cards (obviously stand up can be kept too).

 

I don't think they should try to keep producing  tokens because every body can use whatever he want (for European gamers 1 cent coin is perfect and cheaper than tokens).

 

With my house rules I  shown that is possible to change a lot from the original system keeping the expensive items we paid for buying WFRP3 supplements.



#42 ragnar63

ragnar63

    Member

  • Members
  • 384 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 07:57 AM

 

[edit:  I still think the thought of a 4e is a completely stupid waste of time and resources when we don't even have an elf or rogue product out yet.  What?  I'm going to go out and buy all these boxed sets again because they say 4e and "trimmed the rules a little?"  I don't disagree with Bergstrom's assessment, but I still cant justify a 4e.

 

4E WOULD BE AN ABSURD WASTE OF MY TIME]

 

Unfortunately Jay, I do not think that what we think really matters to FFG. Financially a 4th edition is the only thing that makes sense. If we were going to get an Elf or Rogue box for 3rd edition, we would have had them by now. My only hope is that they make the 4th edition radical enough that people will buy it, and so hopefully we will finally get the elf book or box etc we have all wanted for so long. If it isn't radical enough then people will not convert from 2nd or 3rd edition and we will be guaranteed not to see an Elf box.

 

This may be unpalatable to many people including yourself, but the other options are nothing happening until GW takes back the license or they give it up so that somebody like Green Ronin can have their own shot at it. Harsh but true, I am sure.


Edited by ragnar63, 29 January 2014 - 08:00 AM.


#43 GmMichael

GmMichael

    Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 12:24 PM

worst thread ever :)


  • Keeop likes this

#44 Keeop

Keeop

    Member

  • Members
  • 362 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 12:39 PM

worst thread ever :)

I know from our earlier conversations that you're a new player looking for a positive web experience. Please check out all of the fine work Jay has done, and feel free to join us at the other community site I linked you earlier. Cheers.



#45 Croaker13

Croaker13

    Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 12:40 PM

I'm just going to throw my two cents in with this semiannual discussion.

 

I have loved WFRP since 1st Ed, and I like 3rd Ed as well (and I've spend a lot of money on it), but I would personally welcome a 4th edition in the near future, because I can see from the Star Wars RPG that FFG has learned a great deal by making 3rd Ed, and I want to benefit from that.

 

Thing is; while I really respect a lot of the things FFG are trying to do with 3rd Ed, it's really a bit of a mess, isn't it?

IMO, what could be a really elegant system get's somewhat buried under a mountain of components and conflicting rules.

 

Why do I get a single copy of hundreds of different of actions and talents, many of which are poorly balanced, and most of which won't ever see use?

What I want is 20 actions and 20 talents that are diverse and well balanced - and I want six copies of each, so my players don't have to share cards (which kind of negates the whole point of putting the rules on cards in the first place).

 

Why do "brief" conditions get three tracking tokens when exhausted talents get four?

I had to look that up by the way, because I can never remember which gets how many! - and I will never understand why there needed to be a difference at all. This is just one example of weirdly complicated rules in what is, at heart, a relatively simple system.

 

Why did I have to download a basic equipment list from Liber Fanatica?

That should have been in the rulebook.

 

And so on, and so on...

 

In short: I like and admire WFRP 3ed Ed, but IMO it's an, only mostly successful, experiment - and I'd like to see how good it really could be. If that means getting rid of 70 percent of the components (and it does IMO), then so be it. "Kill your babies", as they say....


Edited by Croaker13, 29 January 2014 - 12:55 PM.

  • ragnar63 likes this

#46 Keeop

Keeop

    Member

  • Members
  • 362 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 01:49 PM

@Croaker  A few nitpicks aside I'm clearly fine with 3E as is, but zooming out industry wide for a second... it's more than clear that we've come full circle with rpg's. The industry is knee deep into games and toolkits now that are campfire-story based with minimal crunch, and easy to digest rulesets. I think the heavy crunch, Pathfinder-style folks are still there, and I believe niche players like us 3E folks are still here, but the success of Fate Core, Dungeon World, and other heavy narrative titles shows where the interest and the money lies for now. FFG is a company built on selling components and physical materials. The ideas put forth by our 4E Zealots aren't without merit, but as pointed out by Rag himself, probably best served with another company. An Edge of the Empire clone with an Old World skin would be pretty lame, imo. A 2E clone with modern dice mechanics is probably what the old folks want and deserve at this point, but I can't think of many companies that would do it justice. Maybe Green Ronin, or maybe Cubicle 7 if you don't mind getting a splat book once every four years.

 

Don't mistake me, I'd rather see GW lock the whole damn thing away permanently than attempt to drag it's customers WotC style through yet another product cycle of lore and setting we already own but if/when the inevitable comes I'll at least know that there's no more for me to invest in and I can focus elsewhere. I certainly don't expect huge seachange to happen just because two or three guys on a forum can't be buggered to use a party sheet, but i hope eventually that we all find the fun we seek.   :)

 

Love y'all

 

K


Edited by Keeop, 29 January 2014 - 01:56 PM.

  • ragnar63 and Croaker13 like this

#47 Croaker13

Croaker13

    Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 02:29 PM

Keeop; I think you are hitting a lot of nails on the head. To be honest I'm probably one of the "old ones" who'd prefer a modernized 2nd Ed. No, come to think of it I'd actually like a modern take on 1st Ed instead, but that's never going to happen :(

 

However, I don't actually believe that WFRP should be watered down in the name of accessibility. And I do like the basic idea of putting the rules "on the table" as it were.

I'd just like it to be done with a little more restraint and precision than before - and from what I can see, FFG would be able to do it now, after learning from both WFRP 3rd Ed and EotE. I would buy the new cards!


Edited by Croaker13, 29 January 2014 - 02:36 PM.

  • ragnar63 and Keeop like this

#48 ragnar63

ragnar63

    Member

  • Members
  • 384 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 03:03 PM

I think in the end it may come down to whether FFG reckon WFRP is worth the license fee, and /or if GW decides that FFG are not doing it justice. The results of the 2nd edition of Dark Heresy may have far more influence on the former than anything we say here, particularly if SW is successful,


Edited by ragnar63, 29 January 2014 - 03:04 PM.

  • Yepesnopes and PiltharShokmeister like this

#49 Keeop

Keeop

    Member

  • Members
  • 362 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 03:39 PM

I think in the end it may come down to whether FFG reckon WFRP is worth the license fee, and /or if GW decides that FFG are not doing it justice. The results of the 2nd edition of Dark Heresy may have far more influence on the former than anything we say here, particularly if SW is successful,

I'd agree. I expect this year to revolve around SW and 40K products.



#50 Keeop

Keeop

    Member

  • Members
  • 362 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 08:22 PM

http://www.dorktower...tower-29-01-14/


  • ragnar63 likes this

#51 ragnar63

ragnar63

    Member

  • Members
  • 384 posts

Posted 30 January 2014 - 07:51 AM

 

I think in the end it may come down to whether FFG reckon WFRP is worth the license fee, and /or if GW decides that FFG are not doing it justice. The results of the 2nd edition of Dark Heresy may have far more influence on the former than anything we say here, particularly if SW is successful,

I'd agree. I expect this year to revolve around SW and 40K products.

 

 

And next I am afraid!


  • GmMichael likes this

#52 Beren Eoath

Beren Eoath

    Member

  • Members
  • 327 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 04:25 AM

I started this topic out of curiosity, what has changed over the last year.  And I must sadly say that nothing. FFg still is not doing anything to keep WFRP evolving or expanding. I liked the 3e but I see it as a wasted potential. Many players from previous edition would like to see the game expanding and continueing the themes stared by 2e like Bretonia or Kislev. Nothing like this happened and, looking at how it is, will not take pleace.

For many older players, that knowed, the previous editions the card where a gadget not necceserly to play and have fun. I think they would be better as optional content not a must to play. They are a littel bit slowing the game down, but that just my opinion and for others those are the essence of this edition.

Looking at how succesful are game like SW or W40k I can only speculate that the future of WFRP 3e is not looking well. I can say more it looks like the next step will be taking this gameinto the direction of SW and W40k RPGs.

I can only hope that FFG has learned from this edition and other RPGs many things so that they will take all the best parts of good/best games and make out of WFRP a even better title then it is now.

 

Cheers and happy gaming



#53 Yepesnopes

Yepesnopes

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,376 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 07:46 AM

I am not sure that the cards are a problem by itself, at the end, it is a way to have the rules at hand. What for me it is a big problem is the cumbersome mechanic of the Recharge, which forces players and GMs to trace endless things all over the game (action cards, basic defences, talents, brief conditions, temporal insanities, party tension...)

 

Cheers,

Yepes


The Book of the Asur - High Elf fan supplement

The Dark Side - Witches, Warlocks, Dark Magic and more

Secrets of the Anvil - Advanced Dwarf careers and runes

Dice statistics calculator for SW EotE


#54 Herr Arnulfe

Herr Arnulfe

    Member

  • Members
  • 359 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 08:38 AM

FFG just needs to recognize that the current symbol dice don't function as "story-drivers" in the way that people who actually play storygames would define the term. They occupy a sort of a wishy-washy middle ground between trad and narrative mechanics. Either go back to the drawing board and try to improve the percentile system, or overhaul the symbol dice so they actually interface with the story in a meaningful way.



#55 valvorik

valvorik

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,951 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 01:29 PM

FFG just needs to recognize that the current symbol dice don't function as "story-drivers" in the way that people who actually play storygames would define the term. They occupy a sort of a wishy-washy middle ground between trad and narrative mechanics. Either go back to the drawing board and try to improve the percentile system, or overhaul the symbol dice so they actually interface with the story in a meaningful way.

 

Can you explain that a bit more?  I find the dice do feed into narrative fairley well.  Success - what you were looking for, more success more so, Banes - a setback or negative though often on a different axis and if used narratively always so, Boons - something beneficial but again often on a different axis, Chaos Star - ooooh, oh, what's the biggest oops that could happen succeed or fail?, Comet - hoo-yah, bestest of something.

 

I've played "storygames" like In a Wicked Age (which I love) and find the dice here do the same sort of job.

 

This isn't to say the cards and ways outcome symbols have been used always life up that potential.

 

As a pratical example, a freeform induction ceremony for a wizard character into his college was passed (hurrah!), quite well (oh, you are promising, here's a scroll with some extra spells), and Chaos Star (and here's an evil artefact to lug off to a monastary where you are to find out how to destroy it, try not to become a mutant in the meantime).  That was all just reading the dice pool result and thinking "what could that mean"?


  • PiltharShokmeister and GmMichael like this

#56 GmMichael

GmMichael

    Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 01:42 PM

I've also had a fantastic experience using the narrative dice to drive the storytelling. My players are more engaged than any previous d20, percentile, d6, or crunch-heavy system. Part of this may be due to us spending some time with various incarnations of Fate, but the narrative dice seem fast, intuitive, and inspiring. There are clearly all kinds of us here, but in my experience the folks that enjoy the system seem to outweigh the few that don't, so experiment or no I'd say FFG rolled some boons with this title. My group will be enjoying it for years to come.


Edited by GmMichael, 03 February 2014 - 01:46 PM.

  • PiltharShokmeister likes this

#57 r_b_bergstrom

r_b_bergstrom

    Member

  • Members
  • 501 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 03:16 PM

I find the narrative nature of the dice a bit hit-or-miss, honestly.

 

I've used them for some lighter variants and in that context they work wonderfully for me. During my 40k campaign, an Everway miniseries, and an Awful Green Things one shot, I found it easy to interpret the symbols on the fly and make up really rich story developments. These dice work wonders with a rules-light system! Though to be honest, in that context you'd be okay with just 4 symbols (success/failure/boon/bane).

 

Problem is, they never seem to work as well for me in actual WFRP3. I get kinda bogged down by all the mechanics, and find myself less inclined to improvise. The PC will have some Talent or Action card that they spent points on for the tiny little bonus it gives if they score two extra boons... and I find I'm really reluctant to devalue that purchase by routinely improvising effects just as potent as that for one or two boons on every roll. As a result, I only end up narrating anything special out of those symbols if a roll is really exceptional (huge numbers of some symbol).  If I'm anticipating the scene, I might come up with a terrain card (etc) that does something special with a boon or two (etc), but if the players go somewhere unexpected and roll a single boon/bane/comet/star, I usually freeze up and don't narrate anything special.

 

(That said, I'd still rather they make more new content for 3rd Ed than start in on a whole new 4th Ed with a lot of parallel redundant content.)



#58 Herr Arnulfe

Herr Arnulfe

    Member

  • Members
  • 359 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 03:17 PM

Sometimes I wonder if degrees of success/failure are a new concept to WFRP 3e players. DoS are not about generating narrative, but rather creating shades of grey in terms of success/failure. If you've played Dungeon World (which is *not* a storygame BTW), then you've seen the maximum extent to which degrees of success/failure can be used as story-drivers (e.g. players can sometimes choose options from multi-choice lists).

 

A true narrative mechanic is something like player-initiated Bangs in Sorcerer, or Raises in Dogs in the Vineyard. Trying to squeeze more narrative juice out of task-resolution than a simple 2d6 roll provides in the Dungeon World games is just a waste of time IMO. Most of the posters on this forum are already v3 fans who do find the symbol dice to enable narrative, and that's fine. There's a much larger pool of WFRP players who don't play v3 or post here though.



#59 ragnar63

ragnar63

    Member

  • Members
  • 384 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 04:05 PM

I have to disagree with Herr Arnulfe on this one. I find the possibilities with the dice pool much more fun than straight percentiles. However it is noticeable that with Star Wars, FFG have cut down on the number of dice in the dice pool and they also use percentile dice for some things

 

When a 4th edition comes out, I suspect it will be using the SW system. A further point Jude, is that more people use d20 than d100 and they are not to be found on here either.


Edited by ragnar63, 03 February 2014 - 04:06 PM.

  • GmMichael likes this

#60 Herr Arnulfe

Herr Arnulfe

    Member

  • Members
  • 359 posts

Posted 03 February 2014 - 05:06 PM

In WFRP 3e, you have "success with complications" and "failure with benefits", both of which can be included under the broader umbrella of "partial success" using conventional die mechanics. It's just a question of whether you feel the additional hair-splitting is worth the hassle of using custom dice for. Ultimately it still boils down to the GM reading chicken bones and telling the players what happens, or referencing their dice against a card. WFRP 3e dice as presented in RAW can't actually generate a "partial success" BTW in the true sense of the word; it's all-or-nothing +/- benefits/complications.

 

Now, apparently some people use Stars and Comets to introduce new story elements, not just as crit success / crit failures. I would argue that for a proper narrative game, using stars/comets in this way would require uncoupling them from task-resolution dierolls. Generally, the times when a player is making a skill test, something interesting is already happening. It's those times in between skill tests when a narrative boosts are really needed, not in the heat of the action.






© 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