Jump to content

DagobahDave

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2,074

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DagobahDave

  1. Posted

    To figure out what this game might be like, I've looked at everything available to us.

    Check out everything on the Ratcatcher's Tale site. Read the Daily Altdorfers and the story about Rolf.

    Then look over the WFRP3 promo and description pages. Look at all of the cards, dice and other images very closely -- even the flash animations at the top of the page. Look at the photos that people have taken at GenCon showing the materials and mock-ups.

    Watch the FFG highlights from GenCon. Read the WFRP3 Facts thread stickied at the top of the forum.

    If you're familiar with V1 or V2, you're going to see a lot of similar terms and game structure going into WFRP3. While it looks like V3 is a big step away from V2, I don't think it's nearly as big as it appears now.

    But you might have to look at all of the 'evidence' together to really get a sense of what the game might be like. I'm sure I'll go back and squint at the images some more, and I'll figure something else out.* After looking closely at everything, I'm very much looking forward to playing it.

    *Today I've been looking at the green and red 'puzzle pieces' that appear on the Troll Slayer career card. I'm pretty sure that they correspond to the stances -- red for Reckless, green for Conservative. Those are probably indicating your card slots for action cards, which we now know are 2-sided -- conservative on one side, reckless on the other. So the Ranged Shot card probably has a red reckless side as well as a green conservative side. The differences are almost certainly going to be the kinds of results you can achieve by different combinations of dice-symbols.

  2. Posted

    1010 Cloud Deck said:

    I have logged back in to agree with this. There is no comparing Ptolus with this box set.

    This thread got away from the original topic pretty quick. I'm not comparing WFRP3 to Ptolus. I'm saying that it's silly to flame the game for its design and then complain about the price when you've already decided not to buy it.

  3. Posted

    Steerpike said:

    Also, if you always have the option to flee when a crit is coming in, it seems to me that substantially changes the lethality of the game.  That's another thing that probably bings to mind 4e for a lot of people, because 4e is a more 'carebear' version of D&D when it comes to character death.

    I think many WFRP GMs have figured out that it's more realistic and varied if some opponents flee before they're slain. This looks like a decent rule for knowing when it's time to run or if you're going to fight to the death.

  4. Posted

    Emirikol said:

    Character sheets can be photocopied.  Dice can be shared.  Cards can be copied, shared whatever.  Unless the system is HORRIBLY BROKEN my guess is that the 3 player max is that there are cards/dice enough for 3 players.  If you need more, make it happen.  I intend to.

    I'm sure you're right about that.

    The cards seem to exist to be convenient for the players. It should be possible -- but not as convenient -- to push the player limit on the core game.

  6. Posted

    And it was just an RPG supplement.

    Complaining about the $100 price tag on WFRP3 is fine if you've already decided it's a game you'd like to try out.

    But it's just silly to complain about the 4-player limit, the board game feel, the funky dice, the cards, the ruins of your favorite game and then argue that the price is too high. The price isn't too high if it's a game you don't plan to buy anyway.

    I didn't buy Ptolus, but it didn't have anything to do with the price.

  9. Posted

    Chernobyl said:

    The cards are there as 'gaming aids' for the players, to speed up play so that we can focus on storytelling. Well, if something is optional, why isn't it sold separately? How much would it cost to buy just the rulebooks? All the information is there isn't it?

    My impression from the preview photos eveybody has seen is that no, it isn't optional.

    You're assuming that "gaming aids" are always optional. Dice are "gaming aids", as are character sheets and rulebooks. I look at roleplaying like swimming or mountain hiking, being a skill that requires no equipment, just a venue. Anything you purchase to augment that skill is an "aid" of some kind, whether it's a swimsuit or a walking stick.

    The cards probably are optional in the sense that you could just copy the info onto paper, and use that.

    You probably would have a tough time trying to eliminate the dice or use a different dice system, but I'm sure it could be done if you were really determined.

    But with common imaging software, it should be easy enough to create your own career cards, action cards, party cards or whatever. There is nothing FFG can do with ink and paper that we can't do ourselves with ink and paper. The idea that we won't be able to modify the game or create our own alternative versions of it is without basis.

     

     

  12. Posted

    colonel blood said:

     

    I came back to WFRP at the beginning of V2 and it led me to find online playing communities which I've now been part of for five years.

    Seeing as none of my real life friends roleplay this is vital for me to keep a hand in the hobby beyond reading the books on the toilet.

    The new system, and I'm not saying it will necessarily be bad, doesn't look it will hold up too well to playing via messageboard what with all the dice pools and cardboard.

    Any playtesters or FFG staff be able to tell me that's not the case?

     

     

    I'm just a WFRP fan like yourself, but based on what I've seen, this game is designed for and probably best played face-to-face.

    Online play should be possible. I think each of your players would need a copy of the game. The cards, some of them double-sided, are apparently an important aspect of play and contain a lot of information that, if you weren't familiar with the game already, would probably be really difficult and time-consuming to explain. But maybe not! It might be possible to summarize the card-based abilities easier than I'm expecting, making online play that much easier.

    Rolling the dice online is possible, since they all appear to have the standard numbers of sides (6, 8 and 10). It would be a pain to try to translate several dice all at once, but it can be done. It would be cool if someone programmed a die-roller that spat out the correct symbols instead of numbers.

  14. Posted

    ELECTOR COUNT: Anyone in the base? Anyone in the middle? ... Those asking for patience, or considering WFRP 3e wholly on good faith/will/altruistic feelings, don't get the passion many have for WFRP. 1e aside, 2e was a solid release. Many, many, many people from the base and middle playtested WFRP 2e. And many, many, many people have heavily invested in WFRP 2e.

    What are the characteristics someone should have if they're part of this base you're talking about? Do you consider me personally to be part of the base? I've been playing WFRP for 20 years. I've been a very loyal customer through two editions. I design fan-books and other unofficial supplements and have my own WFRP fansite. I'm as invested in this game as a player can be. You think I don't understand the passion that players have for WFRP?

    But I'm sure that I'm not part of this supposed "base" of yours simply because I like what I've seen so far from WFRP3.

    So who's left in the base, if not someone like me? Is WFRP3 loathing a requirement?

     

    ELECTOR COUNT: Really FFG. A waste of capital.

    BTW... lest we forget, or over value the vitriol, hate and venom, this debate should be a real concern for FFG.

    Almost certainly, the decision to cancel V2 would have rested with Games Workshop. FFG might be getting the blame for something they didn't decide.

     

    ELECTOR COUNT: My prediction is a critical fail. Paizo's guts, through Eric Mona, proves that supporting abandoned editions leads to rabid and loyal customers. Pathfinder is proving to be a huge success. And if you weren't aware of it, Paizo's playtests with the free, open, public Alpha and Beta editions were a resounding success... and GenCon is proving it it the lines.

    The lesson about Pathfinder is that D&D is big enough that it can cancel one edition and there are still enough players for it that other companies can take the reins and do very well. WFRP certainly isn't that big, and never has been.

  15. Posted

    Looking over the character sheet photo again, there's a nice big section for career stuff. It looks like there's a section for Career Completed Advances (maybe) and Next/New Career Advances (maybemaybe), and Career Entries & Exits (likely).

    I like the idea of next advances, which suggests that you're working on some specific abilities rather than ending up with 100xp at the end of a game session and taking any advance that looks good.

  16. Posted

    Schwermuht said:

    If the game has the slightest recemblance to a boardgame then I'm out for sure! I HATE it - I don't think it has anything to do with roleplaying!

    It looks like a board game because it's packaged like one, and because it has lots of nifty color handouts that probably last for the whole campaign. But from everything I've seen, it's just a snazzy roleplaying game.

  17. Posted

    Sythorn said:

    It looks like there's six primary characteristics.  I don't see Weapon Skill or Ballistic Skill on there, so I'm assuming they're actually skills now.  Furthermore, I can't read the last characteristic, so I can't tell if it's still Fellowship or if they've changed it to something else.  Odd that they didn't add Perception, or if they did, it's frustrating that Fellowship may have been replaced.

    If you look really carefully at the Envoy career, I think Fellowship is listed as one of its primary characteristics.

    Perception may still be a skill, but all basic skills may default to their parent attributes' full rating now, instead of using half the rating like in V2.

  18. Posted

    CRasterImage said:

    So, you are saying that WFR3 doesn't take position into account during combat?   People can't block enemy movement, flank enemies, or test for LOS on ranged attacks?

     

    All of that stuff is still important, even when combat is purely imagined. I think most GMs probably use scratch paper and draw out a little map, even if they don't use minis. The GM and the players can use the rules (and a healthy dose of common sense) determine if it's possible to attack someone from behind, or if there's a danger of shooting one of your buddies accidentally because he's in your line of fire. It's possible to convey all of that stuff without any maps or minis at all, but you won't have to.

  19. Posted

    CRasterImage said:

    Huh?  No need for maps?   How does that work?

     

    Both previous editions of WFRP are minis-optional. They combat systems are tactical enough that you can run them on a grid with minis, but you're never required to. Those games can play just as well (and for some, better) without using miniatures and maps for combat.

    It's pretty tough to design an RPG that forces you to use minis. (D&D4E almost succeeds, but I know that it's possible to play it strictly in the mind's eye.) With RPGs, at any point, as easy changing your mind, you can have an entire combat scene quickly sketched out onto a piece of scratch paper, just making marks to keep track of where the opponents are. But even easier than that is when a GM does a good job of describing the scene to the players, making spot judgments when it matters if you're within range for what the characters want to do.

    WFRP3 looks to me like it totally supports that kind of freeform play. For instance, the "failed real bad" dice result for the Ranged Shot action card indicates that an opponent within short range can engage you (in combat, I presume), so long as they're not already engaged. The term "short range" doesn't have a number attached (although "short range" might have a specific meaning in the game -- be it 3 yards, 5 yards, or whatever). But I think it's a good sign because it might provide some flexibility and ease of use for the GM who wants to run combat purely by verbal description.

  20. Posted

    CRasterImage said:

     

    How can you read that?  It's just white smears on a brown background.

    It helps that they're already familiar from the earlier editions. The Basic Skills even seem to have the same three-level scheme. I hope they've dropped the idea of rolling against half of your basic ability rating when using an untrained skill, and that each level of 'skill mastery' provides a bonus ("+1 die/+2 dice/+3 dice"), rather than following V2's scheme of "taken/+10%/+20%". Fingers crossed.

    I can guess at what some of the other boxes are for on the character sheet. There seems to be a Stress Tracker on the lower left. There's a section for Money (Gold, Silver, Brass/Copper?); above that would probably be Ammo, Armament, Armour, Weapons -- but I can't make out the words exactly. There's a full column for what looks like general Trappings.

    The stuff on the right side is tougher to figure out, except for the Character Name, Race, (Gender? Distinguishing Marks?). Some of that section looks like it might be for spells, blessings or combat stuff. It's too blurry and I've run out of scrying juice. There might be a section in the centre-right that has to do with action cards (Tactics? Reputation?).

  21. Posted

    PHOTO 3: If I didn't know this was a new edition, I might think that's just a good-looking WFRP2 character sheet. The Basic Skills layout looks very familiar. We're down to six (count 'em) Characteristics - Strength, Toughness, Agility, Intelligence, Willpower, Fellowship. WS and BS are most certainly now Basic Skills. Still, very much in the WFRP family.

  23. Posted

    Anonymus said:

    Yeah, i want to describe a battle for 8 hours not a story when i roleplay. Sounds like fun. This is for people who read black library books for the dakka and not the fluff. Ugh.

    Do you have any idea how rude you're being right now?

×
×
  • Create New...