NewTroski said: Peacekeeper, I disagree about the affect of the new dice rolls. Yes, I've seen some people generate some decent descriptions of their actions. But I've never seen some one spontaneously decide that their character got a sprained ankle after successfully jumping off a building. Also, as a GM, how do you arbitrate something good happening when some one fails a roll in a consistent and fair manner? That's the biggest thing that interests me in the new dice system - you can succeed, but you exerted yourself a bit too hard, and there's a bad side effect (and a bunch of other possibilities). Exactly the reason I like the dice pool system presented in WFRP3. I think this is one of its strongest points. I already told to some of my players and they are very excited about this system.

Hi, for those out there who prefer random character generation "à la WFRP2" and still want to play WFRP3 (my case) here goes a proposal I hope people will find interesting. My intention is also to give the players some level of control of their starting character but without having full control over it. Also, I would have preferred total randomness, but the way the stats are presented, it could be a bit bland. The system I propose keeps also "balance" as designed by FFG. So, the system is simple. 1. Roll 1d4+1 for each characteristic. That or your initial race characteristic (whichever is higher) is the maximum value with which your character will be able to start. 2. Roll 1d4-1 for each starting value in Wealth, Skills, Talents and Actions. That's the maximum value with which your character will be able to start. 3. Create your character following the official rules but, when spending points remember not to go over the maximums generated in steps 1 and 2. 4. If you still have points left and all your characteristics are at their maximum possible value, you are free to spend the rest of your points as you see fit, but you cannot go more than one point above the maximum in each characteristic. So, there you have, a simple random system that still gives players some control over character creation. With this, getting low Strength Fighters or low Agility Thiefs is possible but all characters will be more or less balanced, as the official FFG rules intend. What do you think? Improvement ideas would be highly appreciated.

Necrozius said: You can tell your players of the merits of having flaws, from a storytelling / character development point of view, but you shouldn't FORCE the players to use flawed characters if they don't want to. And to finish... I don't force players to play with me as a GM. But if I'm the GM I expect them to follow the rules I choose... they seem to keep coming, so probably I'm not doing it that bad. When I play as a player, I give my GM the same trust. Also, what do you think about randomly picking 3 careers and choosing 1? Would you allow players to directly choose their careers, or some randomness in career choosing is ok for you?

Farin said: DnD is mainly random gen..........lol ive been playing for many years and have ALWAYS RANDOM GEN my characters.....tho this system is better for all the reasons ive said and will keep saying lol Not really, you have the option of point-buying characters. And anyway you always choose you feats, how many points you add to each skill and how to distribute your dice results for your stats.

Necrozius said: Real life sucks! Real people have real flaws, some of which we've come to grips with, some we haven't. Some people have flaws that stop them from doing what they really want to do in life. Roleplaying games are escapist fantasy. For a while, we live vicariously through our heroes, doing things that we can't do in real life. My players don't want to have to suffer flaws that they don't come up with themselves. Life deals you a random hand already, a little bit of control over the creation of a character in a game doesn't always have to be left to the whims of fate. Sure it can be interesting (like your example of a sh*tty fighter striving to eventually BECOME good), but it really sucks when your character can't affect the flow of the story as much as the others, all because of bad luck during character gen. You can tell your players of the merits of having flaws, from a storytelling / character development point of view, but you shouldn't FORCE the players to use flawed characters if they don't want to. Real life does not suck... you get to play RPGs and do a lot of other interesting stuff... Back to less serious business. I have run several campaigns and many of my players were always wary of random generation, yet they enjoyed their more or less crippled characters immensely and told me always that they could not believe random characters could be son fun... the job of creating a story that allows all players to affect it is the GMs job, not the result of some superbalanced chargen system... if you feel your character is not adding anything to the story, then consider talking to or changing GM. Last but not least, in my many games of playing RPGs I've never seen anybody purposefully crippling his character with a point-buy system. Again, my experience, but I believe being a good roleplayer and accepting flaws in your character does not mean being careless about your character's stats...

dvang said: I disagree. I always disliked the near complete randomness to making 2e characters. I didn't mind the random stat rolls all that much, but random rolling for starting free Talent and career (especially career!)? I typically have a character concept in mind, and I want to make that character...not try to think up a character based upon what the game made me take. Add in the fact that, other than the free random talent and stat rolls (which usually didn't vary much more than 5%), two PCs with the same career are virtually identical to start in 2e. They had all the same skills and talents and gear, etc. 3e allows much more customization of the PC at the start, and customization to the player's character concept, rather than what was randomly rolled. Yes, it might be slower. It also allows the player to get to know their character a bit, rather than just copying what the book says and then not knowing what their character can do when they start playing. Interesting points. Still, I have seen more variety when using character random generation "à la WFRP2" than when using point buy systems like D&D3 or D&D4. People always say that they want to make their character special, then go min-maxing their character with point buy systems... my experience, probably different than yours but that's what I've seen happen. Also, nobody will create a Warrior with low Strength or a Thief with low Agility because if you can assign your stats why would you cripple your main character's abilities?... but that's D&D mindset. I like the feeling of dread and a bit helplessness created by the fact of knowing that your characters are completely normal persons in the Warhammer world, the only reason they are special is because they are being played by the players, and nothing more. I've read somewhere that having a low Strength FIghter is not realistic... but why? If you want to play guitar in real life, maybe your innate capacities are not the best but with a bit of training you'll play reasonably good (my experience)... why not the same with a character, seeing him grow from a weakling to a decent fighter... or maybe die trying. And why is balance in an RPG so important? I've noticed that whenever people think too much of balance they change into a boardgaming mindset (and I love boardgame mindset but for boardgames, not for RPGs)... is real life fair? no... I will never be able to play basketball as well as Pau Gasol, my fellow Spaniard... should I complain and whine about it?... no, I'll try my best to enjoy my life and do interesting things... I expect the same attitude from my players in WFRP. So, good luck for those that we'll use the point-buy system, I'll stick with random generation. 1d4+1 or similar for each stat and 1d4-1 for starting Wealth, Skills, Talents and Actions seem a good start.

Ludlov Thadwin of Sevenpiecks said: Also, players will have boxes to store their own personal cards and stuff in, much like in the Descent: Road To Legend expansion. That way, they will have their skill cards etc. with them each session. No flipping required. Yes, at the moment I'm directing two RtL campaigns and the setup time is relatively negligible. Each player has 4-8 cards and 5-8 extra counters. At the end of each session you place everything in the player's box and the next time you play it is very easy to quickly do the setup. The only thing you need is to be a bit orderly, which anyway is a good custom for most things in life, so another good lesson to be taught by an RPG. To better organise counters and cards you can use many things: folders, tupperwares, plastic bags, plastic boxes normally used to hold hardware material like nails, screws and such... so I foresee close to no problems with this in my future WFRP3 campaigns. Finally, replying to the OP, most RPGs have always had a myriad of optional rules and I think that's great as it makes it easier for each group to adapt the game to their personal taste.

Hi, I'm planning to go to Essen Games Fair this year. Last year I was able to try D&D4 there. Does anybody know if there will be demos of this game during the fair?

This forum is great! You can really see a lot of interesteing opinions, to prove that all of us have different likes and dislikes. In my case, I like most of what 3rd edition promises, specially dice pools, but also the cards and the slightly free style of distances in combat. So I will buy it for sure. From the previews of 3rd edition I personally dislike: 1. Henchmen rules. I probably won't use them (though maybe I change my mind when I see them). I prefer the Monsters to give an "implicit" measure of their threat to the players. I dislike metagaming considerations by the players, like them deciding whether to flee or fight based on whether the monsters are henchmen or not (too much gamey for my taste, and I disliked the notion also in D&D, although there I can understand it because it is a high fantasy game). I also dislike the notion of my players slaughtering dozens of guards, mutants or beastmen, that's too munchkin for WFRP in my opinion. 2. And I dislike point-buy systems in general. They result in average characters and are good only for Powergamers; also, they slow the creation of new characters. I much prefer random systems for the reasons already given by Peacekeeper, and because they are quick (you can create a full group of characters in 15 minutes, without having to know what each talent does and how better to combine them (this is a time sink, specially for beginner players)... please FFG , offer also a well thought possibility for randomly determining heroes' stats. I loved it having strange combinations of Careers and stats in WFRP2... otherwise, this will be something I'll try to houserule.

mordak5 said: If they can restrict Spirit walker in RTL because of the smaller dungeons, I would think that a limit should also be put on Boggs as well for the same reason. True, I think they should also limit him to preventing spawns only at 5 distance.

Sunatet said: Liam Kelly said: I can only see the idea implemented in a limited edition which would have a hefty price tag. Thats what I'm talking about, thats what I'm able to pay for. The price does not matter, the HARD COVER does. Limited editon with HARD COVER books for me please. I second the motion.

The distribution seems better. Still, will the dice also be sold individually? I would like to have more flexibility when deciding which dice to buy for my group.

I heard there was a "Halfling Pie" festival in Altdorf...

I like the custom dice, but I agree with some people here that the extra dice packs do not seem to come with enough dice. My experience with Descent tells me that you need at least 3 full sets of dice to play with 5 players (OL + 4 Heroes) so I think you would need a similar number of dice sets for WFRP3. I hope FFG decides to sell also full sets of dice or at least individual dice so that we are able to have enough flexibility. The only real problem I see with pools of dice is the time needed to decide which dice to throw. This time would be greatly reduced with the appropriate number of dice on the table.

PzVIE said: I would love to see a pack of cards with NPCs on it. Sort them into a Ultra Pro Magic Card Box and you have a whole town of NPCs ready to pull out when needed. A GM's dream ... Great idea! This would be a great miniexpansion for any game not just WFRP3. Although the way FFG is presenting the game it would fit very well with the mechanics. In my games, I always keep a list of pregenerated names for NPCs not important to the main plot. When I need an NPC, I give him the first name in the list and introduce the NPC appropriately so that the players have more difficulties deciding whether the NPC is important or not. Still, it is difficult to manage this if suddenly I'm in need of stats for the NPC, as I would need to go to the appropriate page in the rulebook for the standard NPC stats and they would be standard. A deck of cards with different pregenerated characters would be a great idea. It would be nice also to organise them by "NPC type" such as combat NPC (guards, thugs, ...) or mainly non combat ones (innkeeper, shop owner, ...), and each of them would always come with slightly different stats. I suggest that, if FFG or someone out there decides to create such a thing, each card should come with 4-10 different possible names, so that not all Halfling innkeepers in the world are named Frodo...

If you want to get inspiration about adventures for evil characters, a good product was "Reverse Dungeon". It was published a long time ago by TSR for AD&D, but you could use the ideas there to create your own scenarios for "evil characters". I don't know how easy it will be to find it or if there's a PDF in the web though. Myself, I would also like if FFG publishes a book for playing with evil races and ideas to develop scenarios, or even full campaigns with Orc or Skaven characters... I think that would add an extra level of innovation to the game and probably would be a good sale because there is nothing similar in the market, at least that I know.

Lots of great ideas here, Nezzir, thanks for posting them. Another interesting thing I've noticed is that you can create branches with the progress tracker. This could be interesting in many situations. In pursuits, for example, you could create a branch in the pursuit... should the character pursue the thief along the streets or on the roofs...

The advantage I see with this tool is that it can be very versatile and it can be used secretly by the GM or in the open if the GM wants the players to see their progress. The example given in the PDF about tracking Berthold would be a good example for a secret use of the tool: why should the PCs know whether Berthold got his stash or how close he is to escaping? A good example of the tool used openly would be a pursuit in city streets: each PC would use a different token, advancing at different speeds, and the quarry/pursuers would also use one token. Each marker in the progress tracker could come with some small event in the pursuit: a jump between two roofs, someone bumping into a character, a stall blocking the way... Most times you'll have to supplement this tool with pen+paper because you'll need to assign encounters so, in theory, this tool does not seem to add much to what we already had but... just having this tool available will inspire the GM a lot of uses he would not have thought of, so it can be a great addition, specially if FFG uses it in their published adventures... Only reading this article already gave me a lot of ideas about new ways to manage encounters: maybe I'll use i, maybe I won't, but the possibility is there for us GMs.

Necrozius said: The stance dice are d8's, correct? Hmmm... Perhaps instead of blanks, you get bad symbols (regular attribute dice have blanks... like... three, right?) ... OH I'M JUST SO CURIOUS I CAN'T WAIT ANYMORE IT'S KILLING MEEEE From the images, it seems the stance dice are 10 sided. I'm running a couple of RtL Descent campaigns while waiting for the new edition of WFRP to come out... and you also have 2nd edition which is still great.

NewTroski said: One thing that I instituted in our games is the "dice box." All rolls are made in the box, whoever is currently acting gets handed the box, so the dice are already in there. I just use the top of a board game box or an old WH40K battalion box lid. One guy has a habit of rolling pretty wildly, sending dice careening, and rolling into a box helps with that quite a bit. I think if other people implemented this simple system, it would solve a lot of the lost dice/ sharing dice worries. Hopefully the v3 set comes in the right kind of box, so you can use the lid in this fashion. Then they can add that to the list of accessories included in the game! A good idea, I'll try it in my campaigns to see how it works.

DeathFromAbove said: So, here it is some "problems" I've got while playing pool dice systems. Of course this is personal view, but since WFRP 3rd, if I've understood well, is a pool dice system, some could be applicable: Math: honestly I'm not a math buy, but when you roll a poll where the majority of the dice are of a type, you got averages. It's not an issue for me, but it's there. Combat: I don't know the tidbits of WFRP 3rd, but If I must roll 6/8/10 dice to know if my globin dodged... well, it's sure to be a loooooong fight. In addition knowing if my globin dodge my skill (or lack of) or plain luck will not help describe the 100th dodge. Even so for the player. GM bottleneck: in many systems the majority of dice rolls rest on the GM shoulders. In a pool dice system rolling 6/8/10 dice every time is going to be a real danger of sleepiness for the players at the table. Symbols recognitions: I've used d6 for the hero systems, where there is a single simbol (replacing a 6) and one ì,2 or 3 dots under some numbers. Well, I've played with many players for more than a years... and nearly every time the loose sight of the six. Strange behaviour... but that so. Changing die type: some pool dice system use different dice as modifiers and conditions. I've came to understand that this type of approach isn't very natural to accustom. This will impact on Point 1 also. Counter Symbols: symbols that canceals/augment/change the meaning of other symbols have presented a sluggish reading by players and GM, slowing much, much more the action. While WFRP 3rd could be above these difficulties, I'm a bit worried about this brand new dice pool mechanic. I think most of these problems you mention won't be any more troubling than in the usual RPG game that uses any kind of dice. I have some experience playing Descent (where you also have a lot of different types of dice) and I think the only real problem you may have is with your point 5 (changing dice). To avoid this problem, it is best to have at least one set of dice for the players and another for the GM, though maybe 2 sets for the players and 1 for the GM would be optimum. Usually, people prefer playing with their own dice, so that should not be a problem, and I'm sure a set of new dice won't be too expensive.

Sunatet said: macd21 said: Actually, I've been wondering about another question - what will the policy be on leaving the slayer career path? Can you go from trollslayer to thief? Or do you have to go to the Giantslayer career? It doesn't matter really. Some GM's (like me) will not allow changing troll slayer profession to any non "something big" slaying no matter what the official policy will be. Troll slayer destiny is to die. The bigger the thing that kills him, the better, but it is still the only path. I fully agree here. It has always been the prerogative of the GM (and of reasonable players) to limit the mechanics when they produce inconsistent results with the fluff of the setting.

Antistone said: The question is moot, because things that "ignore armor" ignore your armor stat, not your armor items. Thanks for the clear and to the point answers. I like this interpretation and will apply it in our campaign as it makes things much clearer (no need now to check the type of item, only the total armor stat is ignored).

NewTroski said: We've already seen how the dice pools work, which included an example skill use. We know (I think) that Weapon Skill is now a skill and not an attribute. I'd like to see more of how combat will work. Is it opposed rolls or vs. a target number? If the latter, what is that target number based on? I would prefer to see an opposed roll in combat, as I think it would provide a lot of advantages over having armors reduce damage by 1, 2 or whatever fixed number. I made a guess of how such a system would work in a previous post, or at least how I would start creating house rules; the basics would be: 1. Each armor allows you to roll a certain number of Blue Dice. For each success you roll you'd diminish the attack success by 1 (or maybe you'd need two successes to reduce the attack successes by 1 to make combat more dangerous). 2. Dodge and Parrying allow you to add different types of dice to the "defense roll". The advantages I see are: 1. You now have a clearer view of how the defense worked: did the armor absorbed the blow, or you half parried the blow then the armor took care of the rest? 2. You can add all sort of effects. Examples: -an armor looted from a Chaos Marauder could be very good (many Blue Dice) but is cursed (you need to roll a Black Die) so it could slowly corrupt your character or make him crazy. - some armors could add difficulty dice. Banes in difficulty dice would mean your character gets tired or your armor gets damaged. - parrying could be simulated by rolling the Reckless (Red) Dice. Exhaustion symbols could be interpreted as your weapon taking damage from the parry. - dodging could be simulated by rolling Cautious (Green) Dice. Hourglasses could then be interpreted as your character getting fatigued. etc. the advantages I see in a pool of dice are that you can easily think of new ways to interpret the results, so I think we'll see a plethora of house rules and variants when the game is finally published, which is very good as, in my opinion, RPGs should foster imagination and a pool of dice does it better than a simple probability roll.

Aldred Fellblade said: Leaving the tortuous question of the 'small number of halfling fans' aside surely that is what's particularly horrifying. In previous editions providing more support for elves wouldn't have necessitated leaving out halflings. The end result is a reduced variety of racial options any way you look at it. Isn't telling people who are pissed off that they can't play a Halfling that 'Yeah, but it's better for FFG that way' kind of redundant. No matter how great it may or may not be for FFG it's still going to piss off the guy who wants to play a Halfling. The success of FFG's business is not actually my concern; the content and quality of WFRP products is. I respectfully disagree. If you consider it essential to play a Halfling, it's really easy to adapt the stats of a Human Reiklander and create a Halfling. You only need to compare the 2nd edition stats of Halfling and Human and agree with your GM on how to adapt the stats of the 3rd edition Human. There are tons of material already for Halflings in the Warhammer world, so even if you don't want to wait for the expansion, playing a Halfling should not be a big problem. Also, if FFG is not successful, the content and quality of their products will suck, because there will be none.