Limit of Stance Pieces

[Limit of Stance Pieces]

 RARodger said what I was going to say! So I'm in favor of no hard limit, but a sane limit.

[Noob question on Active Defense cards]

 "No" is the correct answer there as clarified by FFG.  A bunch of GMs do houserule that specialization in Parry would add a black die, though I don't.

[No Power to Lose]

 That fits with my understanding of the rule.  Let's see if anyone else has an interpretation to share.

[No Power to Lose]

 Here's the way I interpret it:

Situation 1: You have > 0 power and go to < 0 power through no fault of your own, i.e. you cast a spell for which you had enough power, but you lost more than you had.

Situation 2: You have = 0 power and lose power.

 

[Wizard Apprentice Spell Card Access]

 From 0 to 9 XP, characters are Rank 1 and have access to Rank 1 action cards.

[Stance Dice and Difficulty]

 This difficulty in determining the esoterica of various results might also be one reason why they recommended not using stance dice when not in encounter mode.  There, you have well-defined effects for fatigue and delay.

[Stance Dice and Difficulty]

 I would add additional stakes, like so:

If you roll reckless dice and get stress, you try a little too hard and your lockpick breaks.

If you roll conservative dice and get a delay, the guard patrol comes by again just before you get the lock open (if you fail) or just as you get through the door (if you succeed).

[Ranged attacks while engaged or into an engagement?]

 It's great to have it clarified, but I prefer to say that it takes an extra maneuver to disengage if enemies outnumber allies in the engagement.  It seems to make sense that it would be fatiguing/stressful.  Otherwise, the rule is meaningless, since it takes a maneuver to go from engaged to close anyway.

[Monte Cook DUMPS 5e and quits! Would he be appropriate for WFRP?]

Heretek said:

 

 Monte Cook writing for wfrp…. hell no thank you very much, hes to gamey and cheesy. His rendition of NWOD was horrific and I never loved anything he did that I can think of.  Some good CoC writers might not be a bad idea though.

 

 

 

I think Ptolus is pretty awesome, but that's just me.  I ran campaigns in it for years.  It was rather high magic, because its intent was to be a backdrop for playtesting D&D3, so it had to match the game, but it was also gritty and full of interesting uses for technology.

If he could do a book like that for the WFRP world, I say yes please!

[Who's role is it anyway?]

 Most tabletop RPGs take a different attitude than MMORPGs do.

 

What MMORPG role would you match up with a Coal Burner?  Diplomat?  Burgher?

 

You define your own "role" by playing your character as your character is.  That's all there is to it.

 

If you run into a troll, and you're not that good at fighting huge monsters, run.

If you run into a band of merchants, and you're not that good at talking, kill them.

It all depends on what you (and the GM) want out of the game.

[What short adventures would you recommend from WFRP1 and WFRP2 to adapt to WFRP3?]

 I ran "Rough Night at Three Feathers" too and it worked great.

 

[WFRP is just not as fun as the "good old days"]

ragnar63 said:

 

As far as I can make out the original post was nowhere near a rant, just an expression of a players disappointment with the new edition. I have played and enjoyed all three editions, but that is not to say that I don't miss some of the 2nd edition. Just because somebody has tried 3rd edition and found it wanting does not make them a heretic!

Please go and troll somewhere else, like Twitter for instance.

 

 

 

I have no problem if the person didn't enjoy the game.

"It's a boardgame because it has cards and tokens" is as old a rant as the game itself is old, and it's also empty and superficial and shows someone who is not really considering either what WFRP is or what other RPGs are. 

 

[No more Fates Points?]

 Don't forget that Fortune Points are meant to be spent, so you can earn more, so you can spend more, etc.

[WFRP is just not as fun as the "good old days"]

 1 out of 10 for the tired old "board game" straw man.

WFRP 3rd edition is exactly the same format as almost any other RPG.  Instead of columns of numbers to track on a piece of paper, you have counters.  Instead of constantly looking up the rules for what you can do, they're printed on cards and laid out in front of you.

I think having all that information physically in front of you makes the game more visceral, not less.

 

Try another rant.

[FINAL HOURS (amethyst order, rank 4, in hero's call) makes you virtually INMORTAL]

 If the spell worked this way, the Empire would be full of immortal amber wizards.  Clearly either it doesn't work that way, or Witch Hunters pour buckets of acid on any amber wizard they meet so they never get to learn this spell.

Either way, problem solved.

[Help me write a positive summary of the game]

 Here's what I usually say:

The cards lay out everything you need to know about what you can do, without having to flip through one or more rule books to find all the descriptions and interactions between all of your options.

The counters track everything you need to know about your current status without having to make and erase cryptic pencil marks on a character sheet or unattached piece of scrap paper.

The dice tell you everything you need to know in one roll about whether a task succeeded or failed, how well or how poorly, why you succeeded or failed, and what collateral effects good and bad went along with the results.

Some games do one or two of these to one degree or another. WFRP makes these its core beliefs. Ease of play and complete access to all information on the spot.

 

[Traitor of Tarn]

 I'm with Crimsonsun.  At least, I'd give the target a point of stress and raise the party tension meter.

[Schizoid: Make my reality make sense...]

 I have to say that I prefer the old method of asking yes/no questions about the victory condition, but I'm eager to give this a try!

 

[Opposed Check Difficulty]

 The more challenge dice you roll, the greater chance for chaos stars to come up, which will drastically throw off the combat odds as intended.  What do you to do mitigate chaos stars?

[Who has the fewest ships in the warp?]

 You should have said, "If i had 5 ships in the warp and everyone else had 0, i still have the fewest? Then I have 0 foreign bases. As you've pointed out, 0 is not less than 5, therefore I've already won."

[Recharge Action Cards]

 Technically you play the 0 recharge card down face up and put 0 tokens on it.

If it still has 0 tokens on it after you finish removing a recharge token from all your face up cards, you get to pick it up and put it in your hand.

It may have tokens put on it from conservative dice or other effects.

 

[A Comment on the criticisms that are all over this board:]

 The problem is that they then have to build that PDF charge into the sale price of the physical components, and they have to make it high enough to offset all of the people who will just pirate the PDF, meaning that they would price out those of us who might want the physical components and not the PDF.

 

[Narrative Ammunition Tracking]

 I think this is the way Savage Worlds handles it for mooks.

- Ammo track (IIRC): Full , High , Medium , Low , Out.

- At the end of any encounter in which the mook fired at least one shot, mark off the next box.

- Replenishing erases all marks.

 

[I kill my players and i dont care....?]

 You kill players or characters?

[Are all careers equal ?]

Cyber-Dave said:

Quick question, how does magic bypass armor? I though an armor's soak value applied to both spells and weapon attacks. Am I wrong?

 

The rule of thumb:

- If the spell does "damage", it is affected by soak unless it says otherwise.

- If the spell does "wounds", soak has no effect unless it says otherwise.