Schmee2
-
Content Count
15 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Schmee2
-
-
The "Bombs" they have selected are: an earthware pint jar, filled with oil and stuffed with an oil soaked rag, the second a scrounged lantern oil with glass panes.
I guess I am looking at, how to handle damage-assuming it doesn't all go horribly wrong.
I don't have the rules w/me. And, don't recall if they have anything dealing with fire damage.
Off the top of my head, I am thinking of handling as follows.
The "bomb" tossed at the enemies (assuming success) ignites 1 npc per success-which means that unless the player gets very lucky they will manage to hit 1 or 2 of them.
I am thinking the fire should do continuing damage. How much per turn I am not sure of.
I am also thinking that maybe it should ignore Toughness soak?
Then of course their are the net results of having your "hide out" unexpectedly bursting in to flames. Panic and pandemonium-and that is easy enough to handle w/Misfortune and narative.
How fast the fire in the loft would spread, I think(?) could be handled by counting the number of successes, and a little common sense?
The only other in the barn is a hatch/window , up in the hayloft -with a winch & pully through which stuff is raised-so that is why they want to set the loft on fire, to cut off that exit.
Of course then there is the little matter of Smoke Inhalation....I suppose that could be handled with a NPC T check?
Or maybe I am just over thinking the whole thing.....
-
My players have come up with a plan, to deal with enemies in a barn. They have managed to successfully sneak close enough, undetected to the barn, where the "bad guys" are holding up, and have caught them unaware.
Their plan is simple, lob a few molotovs in to the barn, and bar the door so they can't escape. Their exact plan of action is-1 is aimed at the group of NPCs and the 2nd at the hay loft above,
So, any suggestions as to how I should resolve this would be very helpful.
-
Maybe it's just an unfortunate use of words, but it does bring to mind MMOs. I hate MMOs and their brain dead "mobs"....If this game had an "official" taunt card, I don't think I'd be playing it.
As far as "how to do it?", I am with Doc Weasle, let him RP it out. Now of course if it were in "my" game, where a player wanted to draw all the "agro" to him,...he would most likely learn quickly it is not a good idea. He also might be making a new character in very short order.
-
More succinct and better organized rules is the first thing I'd like to see. It isn't that the rules are hard to understand, its the walls of text some are hidden in, in the Core book(s).
Cardlesw/chitless play, would be nice. I am not a huge fan of either
. My concern is, that the net result will be switching from a game of shuffling through cards, to a game of page flipping.
Not sure either is preferable to me.
In the end, I'll buy it if it meets the first criteria, as a better referance guide to the rules.
-
My players learned very quickly that this was true. The simple fact is, there are really no "Throw away" characteristics in this game.
I had one player-the closest thing to a "Power gamer/Munchkin", in the bunch. He shorted himself in one stat, so he could be "Awsome" in another.
By the 3rd session he was asking me if he could "roll" a new character.
-
Ludlov Thadwin of Sevenpiecks said:
Just out of curiosity, Schmee, are there any elements in particular that you could point to that felt like they went too far in the "G&G department"?
I'm just wondering how other people perceive these things.
In a nutshell? I just did not care for the changes in "tone", that 2nd edition made to bring the RPG in sync w/WFB (which had many years of "evolution, while WFRP was stagnant). Not only was there a general shift in the setting, but quite a bit was lost all do to the fact that WFB no longer included those elements. The games "attitude" regarding chaos became much more "IN YOUR FACE!", thanks in part to the SoC.
Now I am sure people who play WFB like the shift. Or maybe some of them didn't. Me I didn't at all. But, I have ever looked at anything WFB related, let alone play it. So it really just did not appeal to me in the least.
-
I agree 100 percent. It is your game. Run it the way you want. It is not like the Warhammer Swat team is going to break your door in, during game night and arrest you.
Over the years, I have played in 'Heroic and Epic' games. And, I have a friend who just approached me about running one. They are fun. Just not the sort of game I run.
I think you probably would have a hard time finding a sizeable number of GMs who can even agree on "what grim and gritty" even means.
To be honest, one of the reasons 2E didn't appeal to me was a lot of it was way to over the top for me in the "Grim & Gritty" Dept. Or at least what "they" felt made the game what it was. A lot of elements I choose to down play were cranked up to 11. Of course including "Storm of Chaos was part of it...
Other of course will disagree.
Any way, yeah. Play the game you want.
-
mcv said:
Ludlov Thadwin of Sevenpiecks said:
By the way, my players felt the coach scene in Eye for an Eye was much too unforgiving (for a bounty hunter with toughness 2, a priestess of Shallya and a Grey Wizard).What kind of sickly bounty hunter has a toughness of 2? Nobody toughness 2 has any business leaving the safety of a city, if you ask me.
LOL! My initial thought was "A Toughness of 2? What was he thinking?" Pretty much taking anything thing under three is handicapping ones self.
-
Again It all comes down to what kind of game you want. Use them or don't use them.
-
Thorfred said:
Wow! A lot of responses while I was away. Nice the hear people's experiences about henchmen. I realized that one place where the henchmen are very usable is a situation where the PCs will have no chance to beat all the enemies.
Exactly. The first time I used the henchman rule is in TGS, with the fight against the beastmen. Of course that fight is designed to "showcase" those rules. As I said before, I have no problem w/mook/henchmen in some games (like, 7th sea for example ). But for warhammer I am a bit sketchy about it.
When I read through it, I was faced with a couple of choices. I could run it as written, or I could rework it. Using 'normal' beastmen, but cutting back the numbers, to to avoid putting the PC's in a situation they had no hope of surviving.
While it is not normally my 'style' to throw dozens of enemies at the party, I decided to go with it as written. It worked. The PC's took a brutal beating. At one point it looked like I was going to have a TPK on my hands. I think numbers of beastmen helped set up and carry through the dire nature of the situation fairly effectively. More so then if I had cut back on the numbers
In fact as I was putting figures out for the fight, one player looked at the horde of minis and asked "Just how are we suppose to live through this?' At that point, I told them that even though we agreed not to use the henchmen rules, the encounter was set up for it, so we were going to "test" it out. I did so, for 2 reasons. 1-to let the players know I wasn't just killing them out of hand, and 2-so there would be no confusiion in the future, when the same sort of enemy proved to be a lot tougher.
So, like I said-the rules work, they are great if you want "epic" fights however I didn't feel it "sped" the combat up much. That said, the henchmen are are not something I intend to make regular use of. I prefer smaller, shorter combat scenes.
Tomorrow we are playing through the Gardens of Morr, and i have yet to decide if i will be using "full strength" zombies or not.
-
My experience has been it really does not speed it up that much. It simply changes the "demographics" of the fight.
Fighting three mooks with four wounds each, or one with 12 wounds ? Six to one half dozen the to the other.
Ultimately I think it's a matter of personal taste/style. Do the players like big fights? use them.
Me? My players told me they would really rather not use them.
-
I have really mixed feelings on Henchmen.
Henchmen work fine in some games. Warhammer isn't one of them, IMO.
I have used them. And they do work. And as Macd points out they can be a real threat.
My own feeling is "cinematic combat" and Warhammer are not words that belong together. But then, one of the things that was a selling point for me back in the days of 1e, was a review (in Dragon magazine iirc) that said "If you are looking for a game where you will be slaughtering hordes of monster, this isn't the game for you" or something very close to that any way...
So, yeah, it seems at odds with the setting.
It is an optional rule, in the end.
-
Pedro Lunaris said:
Schmee said:
Our TEW campaign was the longest campaign I ever ran, lasting 10+ years, on again/off again gaming.
10 years campaign??? Man... I just have to stand up and clap my hands for you for a bit.
Did it end? It must have been... I don't know a good expression to that... cosmical.
That makes me recall in the end of the 90s, start of the 2000s we had a fanzine called "Unfinished Campaigns" (in portuguese it does sounds better).
Yes we did eventually finish it. But, as I said it was an on/off deal. Lots of other stuff was happening in those 10 years. People switched jobs/schools, got married/divorced, had kids, etc. By some quirk we all moved in a weird pattern and would from time to time be in places that allowed us to start up a "game night"again. And we played at a "snails pace" at times. It took us 4 months of frequent, RP heavy gaming to get through 1st half of PBtT. There was a lot of "unofficial material" added. The Imperial civil war was a main feature in our game, lasting quiet a bit longer then it did in the campaign as written. The longest break we took was 1 1/2 years, when 100's of miles seperated us all.
We started playing in '87 and ended in' 96-97.
-
monkeylite said:
mcv said:
WFRP the alternative? Back in what day?
From my recollection, WFRP was definitely the alternative to D&D in the second half of the 80s in the UK.
It was the best alternative for "us", anyway. Back in the day, when I lived near a FLGS people would ask what we played, and when I told them "Warhammer" they most common reaction was "Brutal". So, no not for everyone.
Honestly, If WFRP had not come along, I would have given up on RPGs (except for an occasional game of Paranoia). I was sick of D&D dungeon crawls, RQII was to "Crunchy"/ and creating a campaign world required more effort then I was willing to put in. The other options were limited, mostly D&D clones (iirc WW/WoD & Shadowrun didn't even exist at the time,).
As for what issues it had? a few, but none were "game breaking", and most that others point out never were there for us. Our TEW campaign was the longest campaign I ever ran, lasting 10+ years, on again/off again gaming.
Having played through a V1 game just before 3 was released, they were a bit more obvious by todays measure.
Looking for advice on how to handle this: Molotovs/fire bombs.
in WFRP Gamemasters
Posted
Cwell2101 said:
Well, they most likely will die unless they find a way out, from burning or suffocation alike. In any case it would take a few minutes at the least.
Heh, yeah. That was my first thought, as i watched the plan come together. I am not above giving them a "win" for a good idea (or even a bad one, that works out well through dumb luck...ha).
I just don't want to to give them an "automatic win".
Thanks one and all for the ideas.