NezziR said: Sinister said: Sigmar – Target suffers +22 extra damage. Ahhhhh! Stay away from that Witch! She'll kill you! lol that should be +2

I thought it was silly too. then I started doing it and liked it. Not only is it less to track, but it becomes a tough and good decision for the GM on what he should and should not be doing with his monsters. Made me make some real tough decisions that I enjoyed.

Bloodtyrant said: Sinister said: Just finished with this adventure. I liked it overall. Gregor Peirsson died to fatigue in my game while attacking, which was enjoyable by all. One thing was the heroes found the temple way too early in the adventure, sneaking into the wine cellar and finding the temple. At that point I had 1/2 the cultists attack and then made it look like everyone was deeply shocked so the PCs felt they "got" most of the cultists, while resting later in the night, all hell broke loose. Very Fun. I had the opposite happen in my game. My players never found the temple at all! They were suspicious of some of the staff and knew there was something strange with the painting, but they never thoroughly searched the rooms with hidden doors. By the time dinner was over, one of them was too tired to continue searching (having been drugged) and the other fell asleep guarding Aschaffenburg's quarters. They awoke to the beastmen attacking the front gate, promptly went out to help only to find themselves vastly outnumbered (All but two of the guards had been drugged). Then during the attack, the cultists finished their ritual on the roof, summoning the daemon. It was a crazy mess of beastmen, cultists, and clambering through the lodge attempting to outrun the daemon (who was far too powerful for them to handle). One dead wargor, a leap out of the second story window (ending poorly for the Watchman), and an insane shadow wizard later...the players made their getaway via a horse from the stables. Escaping the Chaos threat, but leaving the daemon infested lodge for another day... One of my players claimed it was the most epic game he had played in a long while. I'm very glad to hear a story like this. My players come from a DnD background and when the get outnumbered they don't think "running" is a good option and then hold the GM responsible for their deaths. The strange thing is that the totally grok the concept of running in Call of Cthulhu. I don't think any set of heroes have a good chance against cultists, the demon, and the beastmen all at once. I'm very glad your group did the right thing.

PrinceLucifer said: I agree with you on 1, but FFG broke with that many traditions, why not one more? I don't agree on 2 though... The diversity isn't very high as it is, and at least in my parties, even if they had the chance to go for ultimate combat they wouldn't, because they know that they would fail in 80% of the adventures without other skills... Lucifer 1. Because Jay said he wanted that part of the game. 2. I completely disagree with you. If given the choice players will take a high str (for melee) or agility (for shooting) then a high toughness. Every character would start that way and rightly so, since those are things that save your skin. If given the option of upping your choice of stats with a careerless system you would see everyone with 4-5 str or 4-5 agility, and 5 toughness. Because it more than doubles your chance of staying alive, healing, and hitting, over most starting characters under the career system. And while I'm glad your players understand you run more than combat and they want to play something squishy for the roleplaying experience of being good at other things, if you ran for my group we'd all take the str and toughness and roleplay the rest, and if we fail, we'd just keep failing until you either made it possible to succeed or just got frustrated with us and gave up on the game. If the murder got away oh well, if the empire falls, oh well. The point is, at some point the game would get ugly because you would have to force storyline failure on us or relent and give in to our style of playing reslisent combat monkeys. Either way it would not end well and cause hurt feelings. The career system is there to force players into other skill sets to create diversity in stat lines and skills percisely to prevent players from doing what my group would do. It forces them to play a role and accept squishy status for the sake of roleplaying and story. This forcing is a necessary rule in the game.

I think this is a result of two things: 1. Tradition - This game has a long running tradition with the career system and people playing the typical warhammer trappings. 2. Game design - I think people would immediately choose combat skills if allowed to pick anything. You would just get variations of combat types instead of a diversity of carreers.

I'm running an adventure with a dark elf witch elf and some standard dark elf troops with repeating crossbows. Here's some cards I came up with for them. Feedback is very welcome. Witch Elf ST3(4) TO 4(1) AG 5(2) INT 4 WP 4 Fel 4 ACE 3/2/2 Wounds 13 Dark Elf Soldier ST 3(3) TO 3(1) AG 5 (2) INT 2 WP 2 Fel 2 ACE 2/2/1 Wounds 10 Repeating Shot Useable by Dark Elf Soldier Recharge 2 Success: Normal Damage 3 Success – Make another basic ranged attack 2 Boons – Critical 2 Banes – Put an extra recharge counter on the card. * Attacker suffers a wound. Frenzy Whip Useable by Witch Elf Difficulty one black Recharge 3 Success: Normal damage, target entangled. 3 Success: Target is knocked prone and entangled, requiring two moves to get up and be untangled. 2 Boons – Critical 2 Banes – Target suffer the ill fortune condition for 2 rounds Sigmar – Target suffers +2 extra damage. * - Attacker takes one wound. Poison Shot Usable by Witch Elf and Dark Elf Soldiers Recharge 3 Success: Normal Damage 3 Success: Target’s toughness value is reduced by half (rounding down) while this card is recharging. Sigmar: Make a basic ranged attack. 2 Boons: You may add two recharge tokens to this card. 2 Banes: Attacker suffers ill fortune for the next two rounds. * Attacker takes one wound. Etheral Beauty Useable by Witch Elf Difficulty: <p> Recharge 2 May not be used if the witch elf has attacked anyone. Success: Everyone in close range must pass a <pp> fellowship test. Those that fail are awe stricken by her beauty and wish to only be her friend while the card is recharging. Any hostile action declared by Lathenlorel takes breaks the effect. 3 Success: Add 2 recharge tokens Sigmar: The fellowship test required adds and additional <p> . Two Banes: Add one less recharge tokens to the card the card. * The witch elf becomes infatuated with one of the PCs for the duration of the scene and won't harm them unless that character takes a hostile action against the witch elf.

Kruge, While I totally understand you and a few others wanting a more simulationist approach, it's respectfully one of the things I'm looking to get away from. This game caught my eye because it was sooo narrative. I don't think your players will fault you for using or coming up with a simulationist approach, especially if all you guys are comfortable with it. That said I have to stress my opinions of why I bought the game. If I was forced to use a grid I would be dissappointed with it.

Hello New Warhammer Players! Here are some helpful hints I've learned so far in organizing the game. I hope they can be of some use to you. First: Buy Sleeves for your cards. It's the first thing I did and I'm glad, the second game, we had a pop spill. www.bagsunlimited.com/cart/browse.asp This is where you can buy sleves for your career cards. 4 1/16 x 5 1/16 100 for 5 bucks. The sleeves for your cards (Info Nezzir found) http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_minisite_sec.asp?eidm=86&esem=1 www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_minisite_sec.asp Total: 217+ = 5 packs of green $2.99 x 5 = $14.95 254+ = 6 packs of yellow $2.49 X 6 = $14.94 $29.89 FFS03 Standard American 2 1/4 X 3 1/2 IN 56 X 87 MM Green FFS01 Mini American 1 5/8 X 2 1/2 IN 41 X 63 MM Yellow This covers the box set and the adventurer's toolkit. These are two baseball card boxes that cost a dollar a piece and an excellent cheap and easy way to store your cards not being used by players. These are the small cards in the box. You can get different size boxes but I wanted one that would hold more expansion cards. These are the full size cards. You'll notice the cardboard dividers seperating the cards between spells, favors, combat, social cards and terrian cards. Get yourself a binder and make scan copies, or print copies from a pdf of the monster sheets. Then place these copies is plastic protector sheets and put them in a binder. You can then use a wet erase marker to make notes right on the page that erase with a damp cloth. I like to use ziplock bags to store each character in. This way before a game you pass out each bag to a player. There's one drawback to this I'll mention, the character sheets do get bent up from time to time around the edges. That said, I like this idea more than the character boxes. Next stop is here: http://rpg.geekdo.com/files/thing/55836 . this is the RPG geek, if you don't have an account make one, it's well worth the time and effort. On this page you'll find all the nifty cheat sheets that people have made for this game. Two that have been very handy for me: rpg.geekdo.com/filepage/49644 rpg.geekdo.com/filepage/49645 I've been asked about table space for the game quite a bit. For 6 players and a GM, having enough room like you don't feel cramped I recommend 2 tables 2 1/2 feet wide, 6 feet long put together. That's what this table is. I encourage everyone else to add to this thread, helpful tips to new players and GMs just getting started. I like a dry erase board for combat Don't pay 30 bucks for a board either. You can get them as cheap as 12 bucks at hobby lobby. Good Luck!

Emirikol said: Mac, your #5 is a big one in my book. "Other" systems out there are nothing but the overload of miniscule technicalities and endless pages of rules. As a DM, I quit 4e because it was just endless crap that I had to be some kind of idiot savant without family or life to memorize, collate and process during/before/after games. jh I find that I go on auto pilot in 4e. It's like the gm is just there to say "you are slowed, save ends", "you take 12 damage and are weakened until your next turn" etc... This game is more creative improv in that regard, quickly deciding factors and having the tools to be flexible. Here's a great example. I had several players get mad with me recently because in a DnD game a player character climbed a 10 foot high ledge, rolled over and stood up next to a goblin. I gave the goblin an oppertunity attack because clearly he wasn't going to just let an enemy climb 10 feet, roll over, and get up without a scratch. You all should have heard the protests because "none of what he does provokes an attack, according to the rules". This prompted a couple mintues of very arguementative protests until I finally said "I'm the GM, he's taking the attack" In this game, however, the acceptance of something like that with either the player buring fatigue or the goblin getting some fortune on his attack roll, not only makes the story better, but it makes the players want to think outside the box as well, only inspiring creativity as to what their characters might do, and not want is in the confines of the rules for the player to do.

Just finished with this adventure. I liked it overall. Gregor Peirsson died to fatigue in my game while attacking, which was enjoyable by all. One thing was the heroes found the temple way too early in the adventure, sneaking into the wine cellar and finding the temple. At that point I had 1/2 the cultists attack and then made it look like everyone was deeply shocked so the PCs felt they "got" most of the cultists, while resting later in the night, all hell broke loose. Very Fun.

Titeman said: Actually I have been a D&D player for many years, but with that you need a party of 4 or 5 (which adds to the time of getting anything done in game); currently running a 4th edition game and playing in both a 4th edition and 3.5 game. I just know with that that a single combat, for instance, can take a good hour or two alone. Does combat go smoother/quicker in Warhammer?... The turns are longer, then number of rounds of combat are less. It takes longer to build a dice pool than roll against a static target number. However, combat encounters go for less rounds than DnD.

I'm not using these rules because I'm happy to get away from a grid map but because some people seem to want them here's some rules for movement for use with a battlemap. Use a grid map 1 square away is engaged, 2-5 squares is close, 6-10 is medium, 11-20 is long, 21-35 is extended. Never run a combat beyond 35 squares. Everything moves 5 squares for a Manoeuvre. Moving to engage/unengage is still a Manoevure.

Here ya go if you need simulationism Use a grid map 1 square away is engaged, 2-5 squares is close, 6-10 is medium, 11-20 is long, 21-35 is extended. Never run a combat beyond 35 squares. Everything moves 5 squares for a Manoeuvre. Problem solved. Moving to engage/unengage is still a Manoevure.

Kaihlik said: Sinister said: Thanks for sharing this. I'm not sure why everyone is in a hurry to review something without playing it. It's a reoccuring theme that's just irking me. First impressions count and unlike most games this has alot you can write about first impressions and since in this case money is a major concern first impressions become even more important. These are truths that the WFRP3 community is going to have to get used to. The fact is that the game hits you with alot at once and decifering everything can be confusing. People can be totally blind to flaws in something that they like. The fact is that at the moment WFRP3 has some big flaws and although they may be ironed out with new releases or may not effect things in the long run they are there and they will get pointed out time and time again. WFRP3's flaws lie in the fact that it takes so much stuff to play and offers no cheap and easy way to start. It has layout problems and printing errors combined with a new system that regardless of how good it may or may not be will still make people think twice about getting into it. Then WFRP3 has the problem of marketing, the inital marketing for this game was horrendously bad and poorly thought out. With no word of warning the old system was let go and a finished and radically altered version was revealed to be taking its place. WFRP3 would be having a much smoother ride imo if they had announced when the career compendium came out that it was the last book for WFRP2 and started at that time to release titbits and previews of a project in developement. This combined with a lack of solid information about how future suppliments are going to be stuctured is going to leave people wary about buying into the game. The inital release was hampered by the fact that some things that should have been a same day release were not, the adventurers toolkit and the extra dice should have been available from the beginning even if it had delayed the inital release. What we need at the moment is an idea of how careers are going to be able to progress in the long run. Releasing them on cards seems to massively reduce the rate at which they can be introduced and we have little idea to how you will be able to progress along your career. Going from a swordmaster to a bandit because you have run out of advances to take feels totally wrong to most people who know the setting but it is a problem that they will face in a long term game because as it stands at the moment there is no option to go higher as a swordmaster. Now people can point out that you can still RP the swordmaster but it misses the point of what the career system has always represented and that is the characters job and station in life. Basically FFG needs to start telling people soon exactly what to expect in the future and let us know how it will round out the game which is currently IMO severely lacking in content and too narrow in focus ,the focus on Reikland is too specific and implies differences between people of that area and others that is not hinted at how they will differ from each other, they seem to have taken the narrow focus of Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader in context of the Imperium and tried to replicate it in the new WFRP forgetting that the 40k systems while narrow in focus still cover a vast array of planets and people. The game should have made its focus the entire Empire (preferably Old World) and not one small province of it. I would like to clarify this is nothing to do with how the game plays but how the game is percieved. Also keep in mind that not everyone goes to the website before purchasing a game, the number of arrogant people I have seen on this forum who think having warnings of somethings shortcomings in advance is the same as fixing those shortcoming is stupendous. Kaihlik There's more reviews from people who looked at the game at the time of it's release, than people that played it. This reviewer at least read the rules which I admit is far different from the boneheads that just open the box. Still, movie critics don't review movies by looking at a trailor, they watch the entire movie. At least reading the rules give you insight into the game so that's a fair review. As for the cost, buy it off amazon it's 60 bucks, that's hardly expensive. As I've said before anyone buying this at full retail is either supporting their local game store (which I have respect for) or being a chump. Still the game is only expensive AT retail IMO. As for the v2 players, well I'm pretty sure FFG knew what might happen with some of them but as I stated before, roleplaying can't survive on reprinting the same material and rules over and over and over. It's has to move somehow, and honestly how many v2 guys were really going to buy this ENTIRE line if it had been simply a rules reprint update. Meanwhile with it's sharp graphics and narrative game design it's going to bring many many new players to it, as evidenced by it selling out already.

Often people see "fanboy" syndrome because the go to a forum and get berated for something that's been posted 100 times already. The fact is that if you like a game, you may spend a bunch of time on that company's forum, which leads you to seeing the exact same negative comments over and over, among them threads like "I hate the new system" and "goodbye" threads with the legitimate complaints, posted over and over and over. If your reaction isn't what the OP intended, well you are a fanboy. So simply the reaction to seeing "yet another one of THESE threads" causes you to be seen as a fanboy when really it's just a matter of: 1. Yeah, we know that's a problem, you can visit the other 99 threads on it if you like. 2. Why are you telling me goodbye if you are never coming back? 3. I get it, you are here to troll. As to legitimate fanboys, well I have much more tolerance for them when you "come into their house" so to speak. If you want to really crtique a game as awful, do it at RPGGEEK, which is sort of a neutral site. If you have even the slightest dislike for a game, why go to a place where everyone loves it? It's not like any of your comments are going to convert players to your side, ultimately your presence just ends up being trouble.

Sarim Rune said: And as expressed the player number, but I personally think a lot of games fall apart at 5+ players. I mean you can certainly run them, but they get a little bogged down. This is intensified in V3. I would definitely say your player sweet spot is either 3 or 4. I certainly wouldn't want to run an 7+ player game of 7th Sea or L5R, they are good "story systems" but the declaration of actions and the number of dice rolls one has to make makes it horrible with more than 5. A couple of story telling systems that do run well with 7+ players are Call of Cthulhu and Amber. Both stress the story, both are heavy story focus. Granted Amber runs diceless and many people can't grok it. I think the "real" fun of this game is the small group. Granted I don't have that right now, but a couple of years ago it was very hard to find gamers and playing DnD with 2 guys just didn't feel "fun" because you didn't feel like a whole party. I think with this game though, 2 player games could be a real story telling blast.

I used a day late and a shilling short (only with orcs instead of beastmen) this led into and eye for an eye, which my players are finishing up tomorrow. Best advice: Good idea to have characters made and ready before playing. Set up the table before hand, you don't want to be stuck with the players waiting while you set up. This is my set up (the pic is also posted on another thread): I made copy's of the monster sheets, and I use nezzir's monster reference guides in sheet protectors so I can write on them with wet erase markers and use them again without the need to reprint them or use tokens. I found it's pretty easy for the GM to go token-less with a wet erase maker, then you can let the players have all the fiddly bits. I had Klause give the players the eye for and eye handout about looking for work. That's how this story leads into an Eye for and Eye. I also put a river troll encounter in between the characters doing this encounter and when the arrive at Grunewald. If this is the first time your players have played you got to do the extra work and teach them how to build dice pools. If you are good at teaching them, by the end of the session they will start building their own dice pools, and you just have to call out the difficulty dice. Be patient, and go slow, let the players digest all the symbols and what they do. I like to visualize things so I use a dry erase board for the game. A big table is better than a small space so players don't have to stack cards. This is two 2 1/2 foot x 6 foot tables put together. I also recommend the GM guide that someone made ( I forget the screen name but they are posted on rpggeek.com). Those sheets are great handouts. Best of luck! Also at the end of the session I would get some large sandwhich bags for the characters and all their "stuff" the boxes don't work so good.

I have a group of 6 players. I really do think the game is a more perfect match for 2-4 players. I think also that having less players means less monsters which makes the movement of monsters, and tracking them easier. As for the other concerns. The rules aren't layed out well and the books are full of typos. I'm concerned too that there could be lots of card "errata" which would suck. I like other the other aspects of the game however. I'm enjoying it.

boggle said: I know this is going to sound weird and wacky but as a dm of many years why is there never any programs about this wonderful hobby. I mean it would make a wonderful reality program dont you think... Would there not be some milleage in this for a company like ffg think would it could do to support bringing players in and reaching the public at large.. Personally this could be a fantastic idea for the new edition what do you think... you bring up an interesting point. We have a local tv show that's public access with gamers talking about games. I also noticed just the past 2 years the number of podcasts on gaming is pretty high. Of course this is all being done by gamers and not companies. The ultimate problem is production costs I'm sure. Still it's interesting to think about.

gcsears said: Howdy, I agree it is better to treat the treasure question in terms of wages and scaling appropriately. I was actually also trying to factor in for the risk/reward angle which some styles of play encourage. I am in love with dice pools being used for other mechanics in the game, and I thought about the following possibility. Treat the threat (skulls) of a creature forms the number of characteristic dice to be used for creature. Fortune dice should be added for each characteristic which is above 3, and one misfortune for each attribute below 3. (Idea being this would account for capability to accumulate wealth). If the creature is known for accumulating wealth, then use aggresive dice in place of characteristic dice. no successes = no treasure one success = brass pennies two success = brass pennies (x3) three success = silver four successes = silver (x10) five successes = gold six successes = gold (x3) etc... Then the number coins would be multiplied out by the number of monsters. This result would be multiplied by the number of boons. So, for example: Party defeats 3 Goblins. they would roll 2 characteristic dice, and then 1 fortune and 1 misfortune die based on standard attributes. So this would vary between no treasure and silver (x10) if for example they had 4 successes and no boons. more likely would be 1 or 2 successes and 1 or 2 boons. (3 pennies to 18 pennies) This is intentionally tight fisted Chaos Warrior (5 Skulls) and net 3 fortune and 1 misfortune. average result would be: 3 successes and 2-3 boons. This would translate to 3-4 Silver per Chaos Warrior. I think that would be great fun to try. Let me know how it goes. I would consider adopting something along these lines for protracted travel.

Trodomir said: But then I ran into the biggest problem with this game: the community. I'm sick of it here. Either you're a fanboy or get out. Say even the smallest slight against this new edition and you're jumped on by a raving mob spewing nonsense because they're too blind to have a decent conversation. It's really pathetic people. It's just a game and I tried to do something with it and you, but you're not worth it. No, of course it's not all of you. But it's not worth my time and effort (or anyone's frankly) to have to deal with the rabid fanboys. I'm not even going to bother over at Strike-to-stun or anywhere else. Goodbye and good riddance. Ah, stage II begins. I'm leaving threads.This is where we are suppossed to apologize for liking something. All the while you get to use terms such as fanboy, raving mob, patheitc, and not calling us worth it. . I've seen 10,000 "I'm leaving forever fanboys" about another edition of another game. I like this community, it's actually super friendly, but it IS going to defend what it likes, it's a V3 Warhammer forum. While there's probably many good criticisms to be made ultimately, well, we are here because we like it and we aren't going to criticise it to death, that's part of liking something. So even after all this name calling, I'm going to wish you the very best in what you are looking for in gaming. Good luck.

Bertolac said: To be honest though, the first floor provides an outline and the descriptions give you more than enough info to knock up your own map in minutes. Perhaps is a subtle piece of GM tuition in that it encourages you to develop your own maps rather than rely on the work of others? Uh, if that's the case put me down for a big "No I hate that". I'm a game master not a cartographer. A GOOD adventure always should have the mindset of helping a GM not causing them grief.

Baseball Card box. I put them in sleves and then into the box. It's a nice cheap way to store them.

Going to use a npc witch hunter soon. I'm wanting to convey a mistrusting, inquizziative character to the players. Perhaps someone who might be able with just words, to trip up the players. Anyone wanna take a stab at a social power or two for witch hunters along those lines?

Thanks for sharing this. I'm not sure why everyone is in a hurry to review something without playing it. It's a reoccuring theme that's just irking me. However, His comments seemed to be good one. It is more organic in inspiring creative play and the rulebooks do have a large number of typos and many things were left out of the box to be included later. So while this review didn't tell me anything I didn't already know, it seems to be my opinion of the game as well.