Jump to content

Ralzar

Members
  • Content Count

    743
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ralzar

  1. Scenario: I-ll Fated Exhibit Version: Updated 01.01.2019 OS: iPad At the end of the scenario, a Formless Spawn appeared. All Combat, Evade and Horror checks related to this monster had PLACEHOLDER text.
  2. Hi Just to be sure, you are asking about the third edition rules produced by Fantasy Flight Games? Not the fourth edition rules recently released by Cubicle 7?
  3. My career question is a bit unique to my setting and game flavour (and I realized from the answers here that I was thinking about the caeers a bit wrong for Genesys) I've decided to just not overthink it and just make up a rule if a player actually expresses a need to change career. For your question I would agree with others here that the easiest solution is just making a new career. I basically did that for the 15 or so careers my players could choose between when we started. Just think of a concept and choose 8 skills that fit that concept. Done. There aren't really any particlyarly "overpowered" combinations of skills, as whatt skills are usesfull is completely up to the GM. Sure, some combinations of skills produce better fighters, but it's not like it costs THAT much for a character to go outside their career to buy any skills to get that combination anyway.
  4. I can't seem to find anything about this in the rulebook. In WFRP3 it was pretty common to pretty much "finish" your career and then switching to a new career. For example going from a Soldier to a Veteran. Or switching to do something different, for example going from a Thief to a Student. I realize the Genesys career are not as specific (unless you make them so) but even if your careers are just basically D&D classes I can still see a player wanting to transition into a different career. Is there any rules for this? Or any suggestion on how to handle it? I'm thinking simply having the change cost some exp.
  5. I actually used PhotoShop to make a bunch of Talents and Item cards for WFRP. I could do that again, but it's a bit much of a hassle. Part of the problem is that quite a few Talents have WAY more text than would fit on a small card. So I'd have to edit the text of quite a few cards. Genesys is, on the surface, such an easy game to just pick up and play I was hoping to not have to do all that work. Particularly since FFG is apparently producing cards for the game. Just not cards that are useful. Which is what they did a lot of for WFRP as well. Stuff like location got a bunch of cards, while race abilities and items generally did not. The annoying part is that if the rule book had just formatted the Talent information a little better I could have just printed the pages and cut them up into cards and been fine with that. Oh well, I'll see what I have time to fix myself later.
  6. Hm, I've been planning to print my own cards. The problem with just printing the pages and cutting them up is that they'll all be different sizes. It'll be really messy for the players to search through. Not a big problem, but I would so love for FFG to just print these on some proper cards.
  7. If FFG is printing cards for Genesys, I really wish they would print generic cards to reference rules. Particularly Talents would be great to have on cards you could give players.
  8. Ralzar

    Where to buy?

    I had the same experience in Oslo. Not as many stores as you've been to, but very surprising to not even find the dice sets in stock. I simply bought the pdf version of the rulebook from drivethrurpg.com and ordered a couple of dice sets from FFGs shop.
  9. I've been GMing mostly WFRP3e for... 7 years? Something like that. We recently finished the new Enemy Within campaign (not the old 1.ed) and I was looking for what to play next. I'll probably always have the Warhammer setting as my preferred setting, as I've been a Warhammer fan for about 25 years. I notice that I'm generally not that interested in new rule sets anymore unless they do something special that somehow enhanches the roleplaying aspect of the game. The dice and cards is what made me love WFRP (although FFG went a bit overboard with the cards): it removed a lot of the tedium usually associated with rpgs. Genesys is the newest version of that, where they've tweaked the rules and made it so modular that you can use it for just about any setting. So from now on I'll probably be using the Genesys system no matter what setting I decide to introduce the players for.
  10. So I am working on making a WFRP3/Genesys hybrid. Mostly to be able to use the WRP3 Status Effects, Criticals, Diseases and Insanities, which is so much easier than rolling on tables and scribbling results down on the character sheet. This works "ok-ish" without much work. However, quite a few cards refer to characteristics or skills that are not in Genesys but usually have an obvious equivalent. For example, the WFRP skill "Observation" is the obvious equivalent of "Perception" (Allthough Observation is an Intelligance skill, while Perception is a Cunning skill. Cunning does not have an equivalent characteristic in WFRP) Now, I could simply use the WFRP3 character sheets with their characteristics and skills, but use the Genesys dice-system. However, I rather like the changes that have been done with Genesys. Like merging Strength and Thoughness into Brawn and instead splitting Intelligence into Intellect and Cunning. Genesys also spreads a lot of the mental skills more out, while WFRP3 had too many concentrated under a few characteristics. Looking at the rules in general, and Talents in particular, they generally do not refer to specific characteristics or skills. Most Talents let the player choose which skill it applies to, exactly so a GM can use his own setting-specific skill-list. So, I'm wondering if there would be any obvious hurdles or consequences to renaming some skills and characteristics to their WFRP equivalent? Some characteristics are identical, but there are some glaring differences: Brawn: I could split this back into Strength and Thoughness. But I'm not sure I really want to. I like it as one characteristic. I'll just read any references to Strength or Thoughness as Brawn. Cunning: This is an interesting new characteristic. It's a split-off from Intelligence in WFRP3. I like the concept, so I'm thinking I'll keep it. Presence: This is the same as the WFRP3 Fellowship characteristic. So I guess I could just rename it Fellowship? Other than that, there is a bunch of skills that could be re-named. Melee = Weapon Skill Ranged = Ballistic Skill Knowledge = Education and Folklore. Will problably have to split this skill into several categories which is suggested in the rulebook anyway. Perception = Observation Survival = Nature Lore Deception = Guile Vigilance = Intuition Coercion = Intimidate And I think that's it. So, any thoughts or ideas? Personally I probably won't use the combat rules much. I generally hate my sessions getting bogged down in something that feels more like a strategy game than a roleplaying game. So most combats in my games are resolved by a single, or a few, skill rolls instead of keeping track of positioning, range, turns, reacharge etc. So that the combat rules refer to characteristics or skills I no longer have doesn't really bother me. However, I would prefer this to be usable for other players who might be interested in using those parts of the rules as well.
  11. Oooh, that sounds cool. I generally love running one-shots. It lets me play without having to commit to playing that setting or theme for a long time. And the players tend to roleplay more and take more chances since they'll never be playing those characters again after that session. I am planning on running a WFRP adventure this evneing called "The Legend of Wolfgang" where (slight spoilers) the characters go to sleep at an inn and wake up 200 years in the past, just before a legendary battle. Each night they'll die in the battle and awaken again before the battle until they figure out why they were brought back to this day. And if they don't figure it out, they'll go insane from the repeating trauma of dieing over and over
  12. Yeah, I am planning on running some one-shots myself. As an introduction to the Genesys system I am toying with the idea of running a cuthulhu adventure I just found called "Forget Me Not" from this collection: http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/191250/The-Things-We-Leave-Behind It just starts out with the characters waking up in a crashed car with no memories (and the players not even knowing which setting we're in). They have to figure out who they are, what they were doing and what happened to them. So I think I'll simply give them blank printouts of the sheets and have them fill it in as they discover who they are and what their capabilities are.
  13. So I'm getting ready to run a couple of games of Genesys with my gaming group. From my experiencing playing other systems with them, they tend to get confused by the big convoluted character sheets most systems use. Particularly when they insist on having a bunch of irrelevant information on the same page as the basic information you need mid-game. Looking at the character sheet included in the manual, I decided I needed something easier. Some of the ones I've seen posted here have been a lot better, but they kept feeling too cluttered. Particularly since I have grown allergic to players scribbling down rules on their sheets for Injuries, Insanities, Talents etc that they gain during play. After playing WFRP3e where everything was printed on cards, I have not looked back. I'm planning on printing all the talents out on small cards at some point, if we like the system enough to stick with it. So, for the character sheets to use during play, I made the ones below. I know they will probably work great for my group, as most effects they will gain will be on cards I give them. But I figured there might be other GMs here who want something a bit less cluttered for their players. Fantasy sheet Modern sheet (The extra space underneath "PRESENCE" is for specialized skills like Arcana or Divine)
  14. I allways try to make mye rules as easy as possible. I am working on a set of rules for implementing the Insanity, Corruption, Disease and Critical cards from WFRP3e into Genesy, since they are a lot easier to use than a bunch of tables and hand-written notes. I have been pondering how to implement the magic system because I honestly hate all the convoluted magic rules most systems implement for magic (and hacking in modern/scifi settings). What I am thinking is simply creating a Talent for each magic wind which gives you access to casting spells from that lore. If I want somethin slightly more complex I will make it a Talent with several ranks so you can buy it several times to get access to higher level spells. Or, the talents downgrade the difficutly. So you can allways cast a high level spell, but it will be 5 Difficulty Dice unless you have talents to downgrade it to something more managable. For the actual spells, if I want to do that dedicated work I'll use the WFRP2 spell lists. Probably splitting them into levels and give access to them as he buys talents or through learning them by studying. Alternatively, make the spells into Talents, allthough I think that might limit the amount of spells a bit much. If I feel like more free-form RPG (which I usually do) I'll just let the player make up what he attempts to do with his magic and I'll set the casting difficulty accordingly.
  15. Hi I am a long time WFRP3e GM. Now that my group has finished their current WFRP3e campaign, which ended in pretty much a party-wipe, I am thinking of switching to the Genesys system. Either for more WFRP or to play in different settings. However, before I start planning to use the system for som big camapign I figured I would run an adventure or two for a single session, so the group could try out the dice mechanics etc. So what I am looking for is a fun scenario to run for a single session. It does not have to be Warhammer. Things I am looking for: 1: Pre-generated characters with motivations for participating in the adventure. 2: Focus on story and roleplaying. Combat will be decided with a single skill check, not with a lot of convoluted combat rules. 3: Easy for new players to grasp. Any adventure that needs a good grasp of the setting is out. I can't expect the players to learn a whole setting just for one session.
  16. Yeah, I agree with the others here. They should simply stack. Using two Actions to get it up and running is quite a high cost. I have had players with Berzerk and similar buffs that seldom use them, since it's more effective to just kill the enemies instead of wasting time buffing.
  17. I made a set of weather standups to use with the Enemy Within campaign. These worked wonders for both me and the players remembering what kind of weather it was and to apply the correct modifiers. They are really basic looking, but their main function is to remind you of the weather conditions, not to look pretty. They can be combined to make, for example, a foggy night. Print out the sheet, cut them out and then fold them along the middle line, so they create "tents". I have found that cards etc that are lying flat on the table are often overloked, but you notice the stuff standing up. Weather Standups
  18. Hm, is it migrating now? Seems like the forum is down. You can see the front page, but I can't seem to open any subforums.
  19. Since this is an archived forum for the discontinued WFRP third edition, there's not much hope of getting answers here at the moment. Never played first edition, so I don't know. You will probably have more luck asking on the Strike To Stun forums which are fan-run and caters to all three editions.
  20. Yeah. I thikn it's just the forum itself still being kept up and running. The rest of the site is abandoned.
  21. I've started doing this today. I was getting tired of jumping back and forth between forums anyway. Hope I don't get banned for spamming
  22. Man, that tool is so helpfull. I never use it to roll, but to calculate chances it's great. Makes planning adventures with the correct difficulty much easier. I also use it when creating house rules tomake sure that the math checks out.
  23. Yeah, I can sometimes feel the hatred for WFRP3 bubble under the surface of some posts. It's pretty tiresome since it's not exactly a huge community anyway and we all love WFRP. What I've noticed, is some people equate the ruleset with the setting at the time the rules were published. Which I find really weird. WFRP1 is the "weak Empreor" setting, WFRP2 is the "after SoC" setting and WFRP3 is the "Karls Franz on Deathclaw" setting. Perosnally, as long as I'm GM, the setting is whatever I say it is. And I don't think I ever even bothered to read all the fluff in the WFRP3 books. I allready know the setting, I was interested in how the rules could be used for roleplaying in it. WFRP1, WFRP2 and WFRP3 is just different mechanical tools for playing a roleplay game. And I find WFRP3 to work better than the two others in any setting. But that's a discussion of mechanics. THey seem to be equating the mechanics and the flavour of the Warhammer setting.
  24. Haha, nice. A litteral deal with the devil. Allthough any action like that should really result in more Corruption. You should have given him a Daunting Corruption Check after the deal was done Oh well, it can still come back to bite him in the bum via a well-armed deamon
  25. I've started pretty much moving to Strike-to-Stun. I'm getting tired of my gaming forums being closed based on the whims of a company.
×
×
  • Create New...