Jump to content



Photo

Graham McNeil's Post and the future of WFRP...


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Luther

Luther

    Member

  • Members
  • 113 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 05:31 AM

As I've said, good on FFG for the hybrid game because I think it will appeal to a new generation of gamers. I accept that I've slid out of their demographic a bit and with so much material for 1E and 2E at my fingertips, I can play for the rest of my life if I need to, and I hope the new edition will hopefully drag some folks away from their computers and vid-game consoles.

I think the screamers on both sides are wrong, the nay-sayers because they can't see the need for a redesign to keep the hobby alive and the yay-sayers because they don't seem to have any empathy for the fact that a much beloved game system is being replaced by something completely and utterly different, very suddenly without warning or consultation, and this makes some folks understandably upset.

The post from Graham that started it all, however, has a bit of information that does disturb me about the setting, however...

 

I’m liking what Jay has done with the game, and there’s a clear desire to make it fit properly with the Warhammer World, where a lot of the previous edition’s books, with the best will in the world, just didn’t.

 

Is that guy serious? WFRP 1E and 2E didn't capture the feel of the Warhammer World? Why? Is he saying that the characters need to be like the ones in WFB or some of the more modern novels or, horror of horrors, WAR?

Forget cards, funky dice and shiny bits, this is the thing that raises my eyebrow the most. What changes will be made to the setting if the previous editions failed to capture the Warhammer World? While the two games are far different in tone, I think everyone agrees that the grim and perilous world is the prefered RP environment, and even the WFB game has moved back in that direction over the last couple of editions, so what exactly did McNeil mean...?
 



#2 Steerpike

Steerpike

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 06:08 AM

 Well at least he hasn't actively insulted the 1e and 2e players and tried to point out that they're stupid for having played bad games.  Maybe FFG could hire Mike Mearls to cover that for them :)



#3 DagobahDave

DagobahDave

    Member

  • Members
  • 655 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 06:20 AM

Luther said:

a lot of the previous edition’s books, with the best will in the world, just didn’t.

There are several books from both editions that seem to wander away from the spirit or intention of the game, depending on your perspective. If I knew more about Graham's writing, I'd probably be able to make a better guess as to whether he'd prefer The Enemy Within over Doomstones.



#4 Luther

Luther

    Member

  • Members
  • 113 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 06:24 AM

DagobahDave said:

Luther said:

a lot of the previous edition’s books, with the best will in the world, just didn’t.

 

There are several books from both editions that seem to wander away from the spirit or intention of the game, depending on your perspective. If I knew more about Graham's writing, I'd probably be able to make a better guess as to whether he'd prefer The Enemy Within over Doomstones.

 

I thought about when I was writing my post. What if he's just refering to things like the 'Doomstones' or 'Spires of Altdorf'? The problem is that he is making this comment about the new game system itself, not some odd supplement, which implies the previous systems were not very good at 'representing' the Warhammer World.



#5 Luther

Luther

    Member

  • Members
  • 113 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 06:27 AM

Steerpike said:

 Well at least he hasn't actively insulted the 1e and 2e players and tried to point out that they're stupid for having played bad games.  Maybe FFG could hire Mike Mearls to cover that for them :)

Wow. Really? You'll have to link me that post. That would cause a friggin' riot around here in the case of WFRP. But Ynnen would never do anything like that. That takes a WotC level of hubris...



#6 Armrek

Armrek

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 06:34 AM

I'd have to say I agree with Luther here, the worst thing about this is not a the new game. But to claim that 1st and 2nd ed didn't fit into the dark atmosphere I really don't understand. And again the worst about is the total lack of consultation with the fan base.

IMO the setup also seems to be on the greedy side, but ok in this use an throw away era it seems that quality unfortunately not is important. You can ask yourself  if this way of thinking is good for the environment, when things are made to be used and thrown out fast to make more money. Excuse my ramblings, just exposing my point of view :-)  



#7 Necronomicus

Necronomicus

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 09:15 AM

My only thought as to what "didn't fit the warhammer setting" to mean is if you look at the products over that past several years. That are warhammer, card games, PC games, console games, MMO, table top etc.  Is that WFRP has always been "Low Fantasy"     In warhammer online you start out a bright wizard!!!!  A hight elf mage!@!!! things that in the WFRP 1/2 ed would take a long time to acheive.

So thats my guess, is that while WFRP is old school warhammer at its finest, it really isn't up to speed on how High Fantasy warhammer has become.

 

Thats the only way I can realistically interpret McNeils comment. And still have it make sense or he was drunk at the time, or bribed by FFG jk



#8 DagobahDave

DagobahDave

    Member

  • Members
  • 655 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 10:06 AM

Necronomicus said:

In warhammer online you start out a bright wizard!!!!  A hight elf mage!@!!! things that in the WFRP 1/2 ed would take a long time to acheive.

 

Have you played it?

WAR starts you off pretty low on the social ladder. It has the same 'start at the bottom' philosophy of WFRP. You have a limited number of abilites to start with, and you gradually pick up lots more.

WAR doesn't offer career changes in the same way as WFRP, so you don't start as a Bounty Hunter on your path to becoming a Witch Hunter. You just start off as a new Witch Hunter who isn't very good at anything, so you work your way up. Essentially it's a lot like WFRP. And it looks like WFRP3 has basic careers just like WFRP, so presumably they'll also have advanced careers to work your way into.



#9 Necronomicus

Necronomicus

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 11:44 AM

Show me the basic career for High Elf mage?    Even to be a lowly Bright wizard, you must start as a wizards apprentice with only petty magic. Yes i've played the game. And its like lets take a warhammer, focus on the high fantasy part, and make it a theme park.   I've got a 40 Bright wizard. Even tossing a crappy fireball out the gate is way above a starting PC in WFRP.    I'm sure 3rd edition will be like the MMO.     WOW has an RPG too.  So what used to be RARE will be replaced by COOL.  In otherwords its cooler to be a Bright Wizard to start off, for most younger players with no patience. Than to have to actually be a pitiful wizards apprentice.     So lets cut out the wait!   Instant starting Bright wizard!

The Coachman is cool because he gets a big BOOMSTICK and he's basically the warhammer version of jason stratholm the TRANSPORTER LOL



#10 Artaxerxes

Artaxerxes

    Member

  • Members
  • 205 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 11:47 AM

DagobahDave said:

 

Necronomicus said:

In warhammer online you start out a bright wizard!!!!  A hight elf mage!@!!! things that in the WFRP 1/2 ed would take a long time to acheive.

 

Have you played it?

WAR starts you off pretty low on the social ladder. It has the same 'start at the bottom' philosophy of WFRP. You have a limited number of abilites to start with, and you gradually pick up lots more.

WAR doesn't offer career changes in the same way as WFRP, so you don't start as a Bounty Hunter on your path to becoming a Witch Hunter. You just start off as a new Witch Hunter who isn't very good at anything, so you work your way up. Essentially it's a lot like WFRP. And it looks like WFRP3 has basic careers just like WFRP, so presumably they'll also have advanced careers to work your way into.

 

 

And the first Empire missions have you up solo against Chaos Warriors, Chaos Mages, Chaos Giants... (oh alright so you'll die as soon as you meet the giant on your lonesome but its there to fight within the first 5 levels)



#11 DagobahDave

DagobahDave

    Member

  • Members
  • 655 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 12:48 PM

All I meant to say about WAR is that it's still a game in which you start of pretty low (relative to the game's overall power levels). You've got thirty-nine levels to look up to.

I would have preferred a much grimmer, grittier MMO than WAR. I wanted to scrape up money working odd jobs until I could afford a hovel, and then I wanted to figure out ways to secure my stuff from thieves -- like getting a strongbox and locks, or paying a street urchin to watch my place while I'm out catching rats. I wanted the game to provide me with logical, natural situations that forced me to go out and be adventurous -- just so I could make sure when I got home that there was something to eat and enough firewood. What I wanted was almost, but not quite, Sims: Meet The Grims.

From the look of the goblins and coachman scenario, WFRP3 could default to about the same starting level as the WFRP I'm familiar with. If it's a notch higher, I'll probably be fine with it.

I thought I could make out career cards for 'Apprentice Wizard' and 'Wizard' displayed in the photos taken at GenCon. Sounds like there's at least one step from the bottom to the middle. I'm sure there's a Wizard Lord in there somewhere. Probably in the Adventurer's Toolkit.

I wonder if it's possible to start as a higher-career character that somehow trades off speed and agility (because you're old) with experience and precision (because you've learned to get it right every time, if you take the time). So you've got your Wizard who's wise and can throw a mean fireball, but he's fragile and doesn't fare well in hand-to-hand. In the same party you've got an Apprentice Wizard who only knows a couple of minor spells but has the strength and speed of youth, and can actually hold his own in sword fight.

I could really go for something like that.



#12 Artaxerxes

Artaxerxes

    Member

  • Members
  • 205 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 01:06 PM

DagobahDave said:

All I meant to say about WAR is that it's still a game in which you start of pretty low (relative to the game's overall power levels). You've got thirty-nine levels to look up to.

I would have preferred a much grimmer, grittier MMO than WAR.

Yes but we're a long way from that thanks to the dullness of WoW, I'm having to wait for All Points Bulletin to get a taste of the Necromunda MMO I want

As for aging and experience, something along the lines of Traveller mechanics might work. But then in that game its hardly worth playing a character who isnt about 40-50 years old



#13 Armrek

Armrek

    Member

  • Members
  • 144 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 09:10 PM

Concerning Warhammer Online; I am an old school guy and I really miss the single player part. When I heart of it the first time I thought - Oh great now I can work my way up in a dark sinister environment (like the fist 3D Ultima Underground, not much action though but dark and mysterious). Something tha Oblivion made possible, I have just wondered when someone would do it with the WH environment. It could be made really dark and tough like the warhammer world. But alas Warhammer Online is only a multiplayer. I thought to begin with that they would make something like Half-Life, with a multiplayer and single player. Both with advance mechanics. This would be great for both battlers and roleplayers, if there was a map editor so you make your own 'scenarios/battle grounds'. It remains to be seen...

Anyway the core of it is the build up of your character; getting better slower or faster depending on your decision and roleplay. As long as you can advance it really doesn't matter where you start when there are much higher levels :-) 



#14 Steerpike

Steerpike

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 16 August 2009 - 03:38 AM

I play mostly multiplayer in all of my characters on Warhammer Online.  That said, I've got a couple that I have done almost exclusively solo.  You can do a fair amount just soloing, but it isn't all that interesting in my opinion.  The RvR portion of the game is a lot more fun.  For a large amount of solo content, vast world, etc. I still log onto Vanguard.



#15 Chernobyl

Chernobyl

    Member

  • Members
  • 81 posts

Posted 16 August 2009 - 07:37 AM

The fact that there is a level 40 anything in WAR tells me its simply WoW or Evercrack in a warhammer skin.  these aren't RPGs.  MMO combat/adventure fests.

If/when they do make a necromunda MMO, I'd hope they make a full mapped 3 dimensional underhive, and not a big ash waste plain to adventure on.






© 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