Jump to content

jfmongrain

Members
  • Content Count

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jfmongrain

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  1. Thank you all for your answers. As I said, my group still have to try the ruleset in play, wich I hope we will do soon. My GM is far from being sold yet. If I, as a player, feel there is too much going on in a simple round and need to craft combos for my character in order to have a smooth experience, he, as a GM, will need to do this for all the NPCs, and that is A LOT of work. In 4th, you could just wing it and come with a NPC in no time, but I'm afraid this ruleset won't cut it. Also, we have some players in the group, who are excellent roleplayers, but are not "rule geeks", meaning they like to keep it simple, get on with the story, have fast paced action scenes (wich in my mind is important for the "one or two stikes may take you down" feeling of the game) and will not like to have to take a lot of time crafting combos in order to play the game. I still think the new ruleset is WAY more heavy than 4th edition, and that analysis paralysis will be a somewhat bigger thing. I'm not sold, and I have played a lot of FFG's WFRP with the special dices and all. I feel that the "choose how to spend opportunities depending solely on the action you use" meaning you cand spend them on at most 4-5 effects, as it was in WFRP, would be better for the pacing of the game, but hey, we'll see when we try it out. But I have a strong feeling we'll stick with 4th edition for a long while.
  2. Ok, good! I missed that. It simplify things a bit. Still, when choosing your stance, you'll need to consider 42 possible outcomes in order to make your choice, not counting those granted by schools and techniques. Then choose the skill you will use. Maybe only half of the them may make sense in a particular situation, but that's still a lot to consider.
  3. Hi, I'll try to be brief, but here is my main problem with the game for now, even if there is much to like about it. I hope I will be able to get the point through as I am not a native speaker, so please be don't be too hard on me if I'm not clear enough. So: Let's take a simple combat round. 1) I need to chose one of five stance 2) I must decide if I move before of after my action. For that, I need to already have an idea of what I aim to do, as certain effets on the roll will affect my movement. 3) I need to choose an action. For this example, I will only consider "Use Skill" and "Strike". 4) I need to choose the ring and skill I will use. 5) I may need to apply Advantages and Disavantages 6) I make the check 7) I spend my opportunites. Now, here's my problem. As I may use any ring with any skill, it means I need to consider what I may spend my opportunities on. So, as there is actually 12 generic effect I may spend them on, and 6 effects for each skill group, so 30, meaning I have to consider 42 possible effects on each round. And that is not counting the effects I may have to consider because of my techniques. Granted, most of those won't apply, but many do. Do I strike with Fire, my highest ring in order to get effect X, or do I use a skill with Air in order to get the generic effect granting me a way to spend twice the opportunities on any effect on any table? Or maybe I want to strike with Water, even if it's lower than Fire, because I need Water effect X from the Martial table? Or maybe a using a skill with another ring is better to get some other effect on another table. You get the idea. And In order to choose, I must also consider first what stance I want to be in, because it may interact with the way I spend opportunities, or if I want to move first or after my action; and to make this decision, I need to already know what I will gamble my opportunities on, and so on, and so on. That's already 5 (stances) x 42 (way to spend opportunites) x 2 (move before or after), so 420 choices I must consider each round, not taking into account I may choose between 7 actions, and a lot of skills. Again, a lot of those may not make sense in a certain situation, but a lot does make sense, and even there, in order to decide if a choice makes sense or not, I must be able to parse way over 2000 (!) ways a round could go. As I see it, in order to play this game smoothly, I will need to ignore 90% of the possible ways I could go about in a given round. That is bad design. If, in order to play and enjoy the game, I need to ignore most of it, the game has a serious problem. Granted, this is a first reaction after reading the rules and I did not have the chance to play with them (my group intend to try them soon), so it's pretty much theorycrafting, but I'm not convinced this game, in it's current state, is even playable if you don't take most of the mechanical choices out or don't accept that a player may have to spend 10 minutes each round figuring out what his character can and will do.
  4. For the small cards, you can use buisiness cards holders pages - very easy to find and perfect for the size.
  5. First, I think this is a great idea, but I would propose something slightly different. I would go for "advanced", add a reputation slot, and change the advances to be 1 action, 1 talent, 3 skills, 2 fortune, 1 conservative, 1 reckless, 1 wound. Don't forget you can pick another wound and another skill as generic advances, and I like the Idea of having a well-rounded adventurer that can benefit for the 3 kinds of talents slots - but you need to make it an advanced career for that to work. I also dislike the career ability - I just don't get the flavor. I would propose something along the following line: Once per session, you can use another already used power that normally can only be used once per session, or remove all counters from an exhausted talent card. Maybe that could be an "advanced adventurer"...
  6. I going from "basic" to "advanced" count as only 1 difference? Is there a rule stating you have to come from an "intermediate" career in order to pick an "advanced" one?
  7. gruntl said: Yes, this is true. You could also choose to use a Quarterstaff in your offhand (it is listed as a one handed weapon, that is also how wizards in the warhammer world are usually depicted), since it is a defensive weapon you will get one extra defense. In my opinion a wizard using a quarter staff looks a lot better than one using a buckler. The rules as such also allows a robe+buckler (mainhand)+quarterstaff (offhand) to be used together to grant 3 defense, but that seems like a rules oversight (I think that defensive quality and shields should never stack). I believed defensive weapons only had the effect of adding a black dice when you performed a parry action, or did I miss something?
  8. What I would like to see: - Priest and religion + one chaos god (Slaanesh or Nurgle) including an adventure and another 10 carreers (including a few martial ones) - Social and martial characters (nobles and knights, military, etc.) + the remaining 2 chaos god (remember, they don't have to put spells in this one, so they'll get the place for a lot of social and melee/ballistic cards) including another adventure. - Atlas and Bestiary : new races, monsters and maps. Including some advanced carreers for dwarves, elves and halflings and expanding on shamanistic magic. Including yet another adventure. I would also like if the 3 adventures could include an option to be linked together if you want to, making a complete campaign. I think they can cover that much in 3 releases, seeing what they are packing in Winds of Magic.
  9. Mal Reynolds said: jfmongrain said: Why do I get the feeling they are trying to get MTG players interrested in the game? ;-) You Magic the Gathering (or as we say Magic the Tragic)? nah don`t think so, only if FFG starts making booster packs with rare spells and such. Good gaming I sure hope they won't go for booster packs. I was only refering to the mechanisms involved: tap (exhaust) a card and put counters on it in order to another from your hand - think about combos (synergy) for your spell deck... And yes, I was a Magic player, and I loved it. It didn't cost me more to play MTG than to buy everything FFG is puting out for WFRPG...
  10. Why do I get the feeling they are trying to get MTG players interrested in the game? ;-)
  11. Wow, stunning! Just a suggestion : why repeat the fatigue/stress/wounds/stances tracks on the second sheet? Maybe if you remove them and shift the central column to the right or lef, you couls add a new space for gear/notes. Anyway, awesome work!
  12. Sunatet said: Then I disagree, with Your disagree to my disagree with Dvang disagree. I never tell a player to roll his race, if he comes to me with a good promising bacground and interesting idea, he gets to play what he chooses. So if all players want to play as elves and they can convince me it will be interesting and fun, so be it. Besides players are one thing, but I as a GM am another. I also want to be able to create elf wizards. I would like to see them as NPCs, and no random race table will have anything to do with it. And as I said, I don't necessarily need a high magic now, but some magic for elves, and some rules is a MUST dammit. They are amongst the most magically skilled races in Warhammer universe. And don't forget, that not all people play in one small province of the empire (but I know, that there are people that do so for 20+ years now, and don't even think of going even one step further, I respect that, their choice). Warhammer world is a big world, and I want it all. Oh, yes - for a change, I agree with most of what you say. ;-) But I think they had to choose, if only for practical reasons, what to put out first. And it's logical they first cover humans as they are statistically the most common race, the one most of your player should be would you to follow the basic guidelines and the one most of your npcs should be if you play in the empire. (but hey, you are right, it's fun to play something else, and the old world is big.) I don't say it should not be covered, only that it's not the priority if you follow the basic assumption of the setting (human centric, Empire based), an assumption that is, as a matter of fact, an arbitrary choice. But they had to make such a choice, and I tend to agree with this choice. As I would say it's more consistent to publish something about dwarves and elves before something about lizardmens and the other continent, I say it's logical, following the initial decision to have the Empire as the default setting, to publish about humans before dwarves and elves.
  13. Sunatet said: I disagree with disagree It may be stated, that non-humans are rare, but that doesn't change the simple fact: HALF of playable races are ELVES, and 3/4 are NON-HUMANS. I disagree with the fact you disagree with... etc. 3/4 of non-humans playable races does not mean 3/4 of pcs will statistically be non-humans. Look at the random chart for choosing races in the character creation chapter - it should gives you a more precise idea of the way those 4 races should be statistically spread among pcs in order to be consistent to the setting.
  14. In the FAQ, they hint that they will be used in "advanced" careers.
×
×
  • Create New...