DagobahDave said: Check your green and red dice. The hourglasses should have a nice hourglass shape, and the eagles should look well-defined so you can tell they're eagles. Shouldn't they actually be giffons, not eagles? After all, griffons are a symbol of the Empire, whereas eagles are more 40K / 3rd Reich. Incidentally, many RW heraldic representations of griffons were very similar in appearance to eagles.

phobiandarkmoon said: I'm sorry - your argument for this being the best system ever is that it's incomplete? Now, I can see arguing that you have an ease of integration with expansions, as you just add the relevant action card/career to the deck - that's a nice part of the system. But I'm a little incredulous that you are so ecstatic at being required to shell out more money... To be fair, there's a large portion of the population that enjoys consuming as an end in itself, only they'd never admit it. Chuckroc is at least being honest.

Mal Reynolds said: love it, just simply loving it. I am a huge fan of random things. too bad the new system don`t allow for making random tables of anything. You should have seen may random Distinguishing marks table. over 90 random distingushing marks, divided into positive, negative, and nil effects. As my players coined it "the random Disgusting marks table". hmm maybe I should convert it to 3rd edition? I'd be very interested in seeing your Distinguishing Marks table pre-conversion, as we usually roll a couple per PC at character creation and we're starting to hit duplicates. If you'd like to have it hosted on the LF Apocrypha page, I could arrange that too.

http://www.liberfanatica.net/Cartography.html

Sinister said: In other words the whole point of roleplaying when you get right down to it, is fan created content. That's why people are so upset, it's absurd to think we are only going to use official adventures, and official componets as is, without any sort of changes. Role playing is a sandbox in which they give us room to play, it is NOT a script to be followed for fear of cease and desist. Maybe GW is revolutionizing the method by which fans participate in RPGs?

I'd say climbing requires more strength than it does agility, but climbing muscles (e.g. grip-strength, toes etc.) are rarely used for other activities, so just because you're strong doesn't mean you'll also be a good climber. The best climbers are strong and wiry, so their bodyweight is low.

Bertolac said: Not true. In WFB they are unbreakable, which means they won't run away, and in BB they are Dauntless which gives them a better chance of taking on bigger opponents. In neither case, and indeed in all the WH lore, there is nothing supporting the concept of slayers as frothing maniacs. I believe Blood Bowl Slayers have both Dauntless and Frenzy. WAR Slayers have a frenzied rage-type ability. This could be a case of shoe-horning Slayers into existing mechanics to avoid creating a unique Slayer ability, but I do think it can cause misunderstandings if players aren't too familiar with the setting.

Jericho said: A raving and violent lunatic is a social problem in most parts of the world, even Cathay. But Slayers aren't raving violent lunatics. It's true, Troll Slayers are often statted with the Frenzy equivalent in games (including BB and WAR), which makes people think they're frothing loonies. But Troll Slayer psychology would be more aptly described as suicidal bravery.

morganj said: With campaign are you referring too? Could you post a link. The Thousand Thrones is a campaign for 2nd edition, so I'm not sure whether it's being sold anymore. It would require a fair bit of modifications to run in v3.

Ogremindes said: The other bloodline powers in the army book make Strigoi even more powerful physically than other vampires. And let it turn into a bat (I could've sworn that was a von-carstein power). Bat Form isn't a standard Strigoi Blood Gift, it just happens that the Drak Wald Strigoi in TTT all have Bat Form because they're descendant from the same progenitor. This will be explained in the forthcoming TTT Expansion #2 and eventually elaborated further in Expansion #3.

Nice figs doc! I love the tattoo work on the Norseman.

RPG social mechanics tend to suffer from trying to please multiple masters in a way that combat mechanics don't have to. If v3 included Basic social actions, then you'd have people complaining that the system was cramping their style. The current system seems like a compromise between satisfying people who want mechanical support for social characters, and those who prefer to just roleplay it.

commoner said: The mention that GW is trying to kill them is a great point...as I do not think GW wants them around anymore, with good reason, as they really are not a GW creation in the slightest and Chaos and Skaven, for the most part, are. What about Elves and Dwarves? If GW wants to "Grimdark" their setting, they could just change Halflings to be less corny than their depictions in WFB material have been. Hot Pot catapults are admittedly stupid and juvenile, but they don't have to throw out the baby with the bathwater. WFRP never depicted Halflings in such a goofy way.

froo said: And yet on what dice they occur on can also help you out with the narration - eg, say you got several banes on misfotune dice even though you rolled several challenge dice too, then the factors contributing to the additional misfortune (perhaps it was a darkened hallway) can be used to narrate why certain negative effects were triggered on cards, rather than calling it a plain net failure. That's true. We never got into that level of dice analysis in combat because we wanted to keep the pace up, so we just made up cool descriptions freeform, but I suppose it's there for people who want to use it.

froo said: Basically I'm creating a ring that goes around the stance meter that has the ranges printed around the edges in the various quadrants, something like a dial. That way, when I'm in close range, I just turn the dial to close range and its done. Close range to what, though? I rarely see combats where each side advances in formed units. Usually there are missile troops hanging back, flankers, retreaters etc. You'd need a system that could indicate ranges to multiple combatants at the same time.

Mordenthral said: If you have a map you can use your imagination to visualise yourself in different positions. Do you think you'd have to yell to be heard from one part of your map to another? If so, it's Long range between those points. Everyone around the campfire is Close. Medium is opposite sides of the stream. If you can't visualise it, then make a scale for each map. "OK guys, on this map Medium range is 4", which is different from the other map" Using shouting distance as a unit of measurement is just as arbitrary and subject to different interpretations. Froo suggested earlier in the thread that scaling down from 25mm to 6mm would be a solution. It's not one that I'm particularly keen on, given the time I've already spent assembling 25mm scale minis and terrain, but it would work. Thus far, Emirikol's suggestion for moving all the components to a character sheet looks like the best solution for me. But first I'll wait and see how the Gathering Storm combat encounters look. They might not have as much going on as I normally do in my combats, in which case the RAW movement system could be serviceable. P.S. by "full circle" I was referring to my original issue with the movement system, not the OP's.

HedgeWizard said: Why isn't it possible to suggest 8" = close? Or whatever you think the approrpriate equivalent is? Maybe I am misunderstanding the nature of the problem. In that case, we're back to using a full-sized table for tactical combat scenes, and we've come full circle.

Mordenthral said: Are you really unable to eyeball the distances or make a judgement call? I won't be littering my map with chits. The book suggested it in an example that was not using a map, to help people visualise it. If there's a map, you certainly don't need distance chits. Then how far do combatants move with a single manoeuvre? What looks like 2 range bands to the GM might look like a single range band to the player. Most people can eyeball 8", give or take, because inches aren't a subjective unit of measurement.

Mordenthral said: As far as movement being abstract in a combat situation, I don't see how the combat itself would not be tactical or interactive. Take the below image (obvisously the setting is off) and imagine a combat there. There is so much going on, but you don't need a rule for each part of the location. If this were laid out as a map for an encounter there are so many possibilities. That's how I treat v2 tactical combat as well. You don't need a rule for every location, and players are often free to narrate their own interactions with the terrain. v3 gives you explicit permission to use this approach, but I don't require explicit permission because I was already doing it before. Mordenthral said: What makes it less fun if you can look at it and say "I'm at the digger and long range from the gates. It'll take 3 manoeuvres to get there, but I have to try before more beastmen come pouring through."? You get fatigue for that, so there's a consequence. If it were not an abstract system the player would sit there counting squares to determine which path to take and then count them out. That takes them out of the story and limits the situation "Oh I can only make it to the billboard this turn." In v2 you would either use the Run action to reach the desired location (which means you can't Dodge or Parry) or else you'd spend a Fortune Point for an extra move. So it's just a different means of achieving the same result. The major difference is that in v3, the map would be littered with chits indicating the distances between each combatant.

Necrozius said: Location: Cramped Corridor Attack actions made with Polearms, Spears, Great Weapons or any other long weapons, have their base difficulty increased by <p>. Location: Slime Pit Any time a Chaos Star is rolled for a Physical Action or Skill, the PC must immediately make a <pp> Coordination test (Ag) or gain the "Something" Condition Card (whatever condition best represents falling down on one's ass). I would append the Cramped Corridor card with a line saying that combatants can only fight in single file. The Slime Pit should also have something for actually falling into the pit. Perhaps 2 Bane results on any test rolled in that location means you fall into the slime.

Sarim Rune said: One thing I would be worried about a dungeon is turning the combat into a tactical game. Just something about dungeons seems to = squares/tiles. Instead, I would keep the abstract movement. With the Dundjinni mapping program, you can make dungeon floorplans with the gridlines turned off. However, Necrozius' Dungeoneer idea does fit better with the v3 spatial approach IMO than using traditional floorplans.

Sarim Rune said: This game is only as structured as you make it out to be. v3 combat is about as structured as WFRP v2's (but in a different way), and more structured than v1's. That's not necessarily a bad thing, mind you. Many people prefer a more gamist combat system.

Sarim Rune said: 3rd edition here promotes the GM to add narration and flair, via extra dice and interpreting Boons, Banes, Comets and the Chaos Star. Outside of combat and social conflict I'd agree with you, because there are no cards for other skills. However, in combat Bane and Boon results are dictated by cards.

Sarim Rune said: I happen to find that Warhammer is a system that supports you in this endeavor. D&D 3.X didn't support you and 4th edition happens to c-block you. I'm not saying that you can't add narrative flair to combat with any system but some systems just seem to work against you rather than for you. Keep in mind, I'm coming mainly from WFRP v1 and v2, not D&D (nothing against D&D though!). WFRP v1 was the epitome of rules-light tactical combat. v2 added some gamist combat options that took awhile for pro-atmosphere GMs to get used to, but it still felt pretty simulationist. v3 takes a very different approach to combat - much more gamist than simulationist.

monkeylite said: Herr Arnulfe said: Isn't it great that we live in a world where everybody is different? I'm not. But you are! You're just different in a different way.