Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ynnen

The Bad, The Worse, and the Ugly >> A look at handling enemies & adversaries in WFRP

Recommended Posts

Mal Reynolds said:

Loswaith said:

 

Well atleast the Designer Diary was accurate in the title, it speaks much of the way it seems Warhammer has been taken.

The one thing I realy liked about Warhammer was as a PC you are an average joe, now you arent.  Henchman AKA mooks, are way past the boundry of the game being about average people becoming more only by circumstance.

 

 

 

Don`t make me laugh? PC in warhammer the Average Joe?  What, you took away their FATE POINTS? That`s not nice. gran_risa.gif

Average people in the Warhammer world don`t have FATE POINTS, heroes and adventurers as well as certain antagonists have it, but not the average run-of-the-mill.

Aaand you spectacularly miss the point. Fate Points are the ONLY things seperating normal people from PCs/major antagonists etc, at least at first career. In something like D&D, the PCs are so ridiculously overpowered compared to NPCs that it breaks realism (not that D&D wants that, its just what made WFRP so much better in my opinion)

The henchmen rules throw enemy protagonists back into being much, much worse than the PCs. However, I do note that there was talk in the article of a non-henchman Gor vs a henchman Gor, so its an optional rule in any case - the intention is probably just to speed up large battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

phobiandarkmoon said:

 

 

Aaand you spectacularly miss the point. Fate Points are the ONLY things seperating normal people from PCs/major antagonists etc, at least at first career. In something like D&D, the PCs are so ridiculously overpowered compared to NPCs that it breaks realism (not that D&D wants that, its just what made WFRP so much better in my opinion)

v3 starting characters seem to be on the same power level as v2 characters. They aren't DnD characters. The henchmen rules seem to be a way to simplify and speed up mass combat.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crimsontree said:

 

What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

Why would I need ABS, Servo-steering, a GPS-System, Cruise-Control, Servo-Breaks, and all this fancy stuff in my new car, when my Mini Cooper from the 70's also managed to get me from Vienna to Graz?

Things get better and improved all the time. With your attitude, we'd still be playing D&D First Edition (shudder) gran_risa.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PzVIE said:

crimsontree said:

 

 

What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

 

 

Why would I need ABS, Servo-steering, a GPS-System, Cruise-Control, Servo-Breaks, and all this fancy stuff in my new car, when my Mini Cooper from the 70's also managed to get me from Vienna to Graz?

Things get better and improved all the time. With your attitude, we'd still be playing D&D First Edition (shudder) gran_risa.gif

 

So, you respond to a question asking what improvements are in the new edition by saying he doesn't want any improvements? Straw man...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PzVIE said:

crimsontree said:

 

 

What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

 

 

Why would I need ABS, Servo-steering, a GPS-System, Cruise-Control, Servo-Breaks, and all this fancy stuff in my new car, when my Mini Cooper from the 70's also managed to get me from Vienna to Graz?

Things get better and improved all the time. With your attitude, we'd still be playing D&D First Edition (shudder) gran_risa.gif

PzVIE said:

crimsontree said:

 

 

What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

 

 

Why would I need ABS, Servo-steering, a GPS-System, Cruise-Control, Servo-Breaks, and all this fancy stuff in my new car, when my Mini Cooper from the 70's also managed to get me from Vienna to Graz?

Things get better and improved all the time. With your attitude, we'd still be playing D&D First Edition (shudder) gran_risa.gif

 

I see you haven't answered my questions. I'll repeat them.

 

What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crimsontree said:

What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

I simply expect it to be better, to be an improvement! I do not think that FFG will release a dog, they're too experienced for that. I don't wanna make an issue of the $100 price tag (which is approximately the price for the v2 core book two thin other books), there are threads below dealing with it. For me, a lot of the rules and mechanics I know so far from the diaries are clearly improvements, like the dicepool system vs. the %-system, Skills, Spells, Actions, Careers etc. on cards/sheets rather than divided into various books and some more. I also expect them to have developed a better encumbrance and pricing system than v2 had!

And finally, it looks better cool.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crimsontree said:


What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

 

I think it is the radical change in the system, I prefer the dicepool to the d100% system and see the skills, actions, careers and the like on cards as a good idea. It is easy to update when new books/expansions are published. No need to refer to multiple books. I perceive a value in the components provided so I will pay the $100 for them rather than a game that does not provided them for $40.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crimsontree said:

What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

Better dice mechanics, better character creation and advancement, more support for non-combat scenarios and (hopefully) more fluff (it'd be nice to get a final page count...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dvang said:

 

...

I fail to see how the introduction of rules for henchmen in any way breaks the game being about 'average' people.  Primarily, the GM in no way is required to use henchmen.  He can, in fact, run all the NPCs as standard.  The henchmen rules are merely a way for a GM to streamline large groups of multiple enemies.  For example, the group faces a dozen rats.  The GM could divide the rats into 2 henchmen groups and thus only roll/do actions twice rather than twelve times.  Also remember the fact that although the PCs *think* of themselves as 'average joes', they are in fact *not* average in the grand scheme of things.  They are, by the very nature of being a PC, special and important.  They get personal Fate/Fortune points, for example.  They are the protagonists of the story.  While their power and influence might start small, once the PC's first adventure starts they are no longer ordinary.  They are now more influential, and more important, than your average Empire citizen simply by leaving their 'normal' routine and participating in an adventure.

 

 

 

Actually for me it changes the scope quite convincingly by it being part of the core rules and thus being the 'norm' of the game.  Pooled health hardly makes sence that a good damage roll from a PC can mysteriously kill 6 enemies (assuming they dont all keep going untill the pool runs out, which I dont think it does).
Groups of enemies have always been far more dangerous than a couple of more powerful ones too in warhammer

Mooks and in this case henchman simply say this is here for the PCs to kill, which doesnt make sence for a 'realistic' world setting (be it a fantasy one or otherwise).  While the story revolves around the PCs and they effect the world, the world shouldnt revolve around the PCs.  Possibly a way out there opinion in the PRG community but to me its integeral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

phobiandarkmoon said:

Mal Reynolds said:

 

Loswaith said:

 

Well atleast the Designer Diary was accurate in the title, it speaks much of the way it seems Warhammer has been taken.

The one thing I realy liked about Warhammer was as a PC you are an average joe, now you arent.  Henchman AKA mooks, are way past the boundry of the game being about average people becoming more only by circumstance.

  

Don`t make me laugh? PC in warhammer the Average Joe?  What, you took away their FATE POINTS? That`s not nice. gran_risa.gif

Average people in the Warhammer world don`t have FATE POINTS, heroes and adventurers as well as certain antagonists have it, but not the average run-of-the-mill.

 

 

Aaand you spectacularly miss the point. Fate Points are the ONLY things seperating normal people from PCs/major antagonists etc, at least at first career. In something like D&D, the PCs are so ridiculously overpowered compared to NPCs that it breaks realism (not that D&D wants that, its just what made WFRP so much better in my opinion)

The henchmen rules throw enemy protagonists back into being much, much worse than the PCs. However, I do note that there was talk in the article of a non-henchman Gor vs a henchman Gor, so its an optional rule in any case - the intention is probably just to speed up large battles.

 

Actually if you look at the way fate and fortune points work they are a purely out of character mechanical reason to allow players luck or to counter bad luck (in the case of death) should they want to continue playing their character. 

Trying to explain them as a feature within the world is plain silly for the most part.  A character simply gets fate points because they are being played by a player, give the same character with the same deeds as an NPC they more than likely wouldnt have fate or fortune points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loswaith said:


Groups of enemies have always been far more dangerous than a couple of more powerful ones too in warhammer

Not really. Due to the way the damage/armour system worked out, groups of weaker enemies tended to be little more than speed bumps for the PCs to slowly roll over. Your typical goblin horde had little chance of actually hurting a PC warrior with a TB of 4, plate armour and a shield. He'd slowly grind through them. A single powerful opponent, on the other hand, probably had better WS, S and A, allowing him to actually hurt the PC.

 

Loswaith said:

Mooks and in this case henchman simply say this is here for the PCs to kill, which doesnt make sence for a 'realistic' world setting (be it a fantasy one or otherwise).  While the story revolves around the PCs and they effect the world, the world shouldnt revolve around the PCs.  Possibly a way out there opinion in the PRG community but to me its integeral.

 

The henchmen rules simply allow you to have large battles without slowing the game to a crawl. The henchmen are probably more dangerous as a group than individually, because the extra dice they get may allow them to get past the PC's defences. The world won't revolve around the PCs any more than it already does, you just won't have to spend 2 hours resolving a fight between 4 PCs and a dozen unnamed mooks.

And, of course, you can just not use the henchmen rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mal Reynolds said:

 Don`t make me laugh? PC in warhammer the Average Joe? What, you took away their FATE POINTS? That`s not nice.

Average people in the Warhammer world don`t have FATE POINTS, heroes and adventurers as well as certain antagonists have it, but not the average run-of-the-mill.

Average people in the old world dont have fate points.   Players or GMs have fate points FOR a character.

If you look at the way fate and fortune points work they are a purely out of character mechanical reason to allow players luck or to counter bad luck (in the case of death) should they want to continue playing their character.  Atleast thats how I see them and feel thats how they are intended.

Trying to explain them as a feature within the world is plain silly for the most part.  A character simply gets fate points because they are being played by a player, give the same character with the same deeds as an NPC they more than likely wouldnt have fate or fortune points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

macd21 said:

 

Loswaith said:


Groups of enemies have always been far more dangerous than a couple of more powerful ones too in warhammer

 

Not really. Due to the way the damage/armour system worked out, groups of weaker enemies tended to be little more than speed bumps for the PCs to slowly roll over. Your typical goblin horde had little chance of actually hurting a PC warrior with a TB of 4, plate armour and a shield. He'd slowly grind through them. A single powerful opponent, on the other hand, probably had better WS, S and A, allowing him to actually hurt the PC.

 

Loswaith said:

 

Mooks and in this case henchman simply say this is here for the PCs to kill, which doesnt make sence for a 'realistic' world setting (be it a fantasy one or otherwise).  While the story revolves around the PCs and they effect the world, the world shouldnt revolve around the PCs.  Possibly a way out there opinion in the PRG community but to me its integeral.

 

 

 

The henchmen rules simply allow you to have large battles without slowing the game to a crawl. The henchmen are probably more dangerous as a group than individually, because the extra dice they get may allow them to get past the PC's defences. The world won't revolve around the PCs any more than it already does, you just won't have to spend 2 hours resolving a fight between 4 PCs and a dozen unnamed mooks.

And, of course, you can just not use the henchmen rules.

 

Cant say I ever had a game slow to a crawl just because I used a large group of enemies. 

Then to me WFRP realy isnt about the large battles, it's more about the small ones.

PCs trying to figure out the most basic of dice mechanics on the otherhand......

The benefit I can see to the Henchman style rules are for creatures that attack as swarms.  Eg. rats, snotlings, nurglings and the like.

 

Whether the henchmen are more deadly or not depends on how the defence of a character is portrayed, if its an opposed roll it may do if its simply succeeding it wont.  Either way multiple enemies each having their own chance to do something will likely result in better odds of one doing something that just one roll for many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant say I ever had a game slow to a crawl just because I used a large group of enemies. 

Lucky you. I've found that more than 6 opponents and WFRP becomes an annoying grindfest.

Then to me WFRP realy isnt about the large battles, it's more about the small ones.

Some of the published scenarios include dozens of opponents in a single combat.

PCs trying to figure out the most basic of dice mechanics on the otherhand......

What's to figure out? The dice mechanics seem simple and easy to understand.

The benefit I can see to the Henchman style rules are for creatures that attack as swarms.  Eg. rats, snotlings, nurglings and the like.

Or goblins, skaven, bandits... pretty much any large group of weak opponents. 

Whether the henchmen are more deadly or not depends on how the defence of a character is portrayed, if its an opposed roll it may do if its simply succeeding it wont.  Either way multiple enemies each having their own chance to do something will likely result in better odds of one doing something that just one roll for many.

Multiple weak enemies may simply be unable to hurt the characters. This was a huge problem with v1 and v2. A poor opponents probably wouldn't hit, it hit it might be parried or dodged, if it still hit then its attack probably wouldn't get past the armour. With one strong roll for many, you're more likely to hit and your hit is more likely to get past the armour and toughness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But with most other RPGs, I don't need to use over two dozen custom dice, plus a lot of cards for talents/feats, plus cards for classes, and so on to play them. in WFRP3 I can't play without them.

Actually, you can actually play without some of them. You do need someone to own at least one set of them (or a .pdf list someone will make shortly after the game is released), but for actual game play you could just as easily write the information down on a piece of paper or character sheet. But, your point is valid to an extent. However, there are a number of RPGs that require also extra bits. Torg, as a quick example off the top of my head. I've heard D&D 4e has cards too (although I haven't tried D&D since 3.0), etc. My point was that the $100 is reasonable for what you get. Sure, it might be more overall than what you normally pay for most other RPGs, but that doesn't mean that it isn't worth what its valued at.

No one, either here or on the StS forum has yet to say why this game is so fantastic. What does it do better than the previous editions that justifies the $100 outlay for the core set? Why buy this $100 game rather than the $40 alternatives?

1. You can critical at any time, rather than only when wounds equal 0.
2. You can fail, yet have some positive results.
3. You can succeed, yet have negative results.
4. You can look at a dice roll, and the dice that make up the roll, and see what the various factors are that influence the roll itself.
5. The dice pool provides a more dynamic roll than the d100
6. Character generation allows the player to tailor the PC to the concept, rather than randomly rolling and trying to make a PC out of it.
7. Party sheet, as a good way to provide the group with a known theme and bonus for being cohesive in roleplaying and working together.
8. Players can contribute cards to the party that benefit everyone, as long as they remain near the party.
9. You don't need to use miniatures. While I and my group love miniatures and will probably still use miniatures, 3e gives GMs great flexibility because it has rules for running combats without miniatures. This is especially handy for larger-scale battles where moving dozens of miniatures can really bog down the game.
10. Henchmen rules to speed up massed combat. I think these are very handy, and are better than previous versions of WFRP (because they don't have them at all). The GM has the option of grouping multiple enemies for faster combat resolution.

In my opinion, all the above points make 3e better than previous versions. I'm sure there are more that I missed, but I'm sick right now and too tired to dig through the preview diaries (plus there's still a lot of rules that we haven't been shown). Now, I'm not saying that these rules alone make the game worth $50 more than other RPGs. The point is that the rules seem to be better plus you get a bunch of accessories (including dice) for that other $50. I agree its a lot of cash to dump at once on a single game.

Look at it this way, you can buy a generic fast-food chesseburger for $3. Now, assume you can buy a restaurant cheeseburger with fries and a side of vegatables for $9. Sure, the generic cheeseburger will help fill you up when you're hungry. The restaurant burger, though, comes with fries and a side of fresh vegatables. Now, if you don't want the vegatables or the fries, then the restaurant cheeseburger isn't really a good deal for the money. Its a slightly better quality burger, but won't really fill you up more. If you're only going to eat the burger, then the burger itself isn't really $6 better. However, getting the better burger plus fries plus vegatables really is worth the additional $6.

Actually for me it changes the scope quite convincingly by it being part of the core rules and thus being the 'norm' of the game. Pooled health hardly makes sence that a good damage roll from a PC can mysteriously kill 6 enemies (assuming they dont all keep going untill the pool runs out, which I dont think it does).
Groups of enemies have always been far more dangerous than a couple of more powerful ones too in warhammer

Mooks and in this case henchman simply say this is here for the PCs to kill, which doesnt make sence for a 'realistic' world setting (be it a fantasy one or otherwise). While the story revolves around the PCs and they effect the world, the world shouldnt revolve around the PCs. Possibly a way out there opinion in the PRG community but to me its integeral.

As mentioned, low-threat enemies like snotlings and goblins can't realistically pose a danger to players once they get a few advances, as individually they couldn't do much. The henchmen rules provide a means of making a large group of enemies more powerful as a whole, without being unbalanced, while also speeding up play.

Cant say I ever had a game slow to a crawl just because I used a large group of enemies.

Then to me WFRP realy isnt about the large battles, it's more about the small ones.

Then you don't use miniatures much, do you? Keeping track of initiative, rolling to hit for a dozen enemies, as well as placing and manipulating miniatures can slow a combat down.  If you don't have lots of enemies, then there is no need to use henchmen rules. In fact, even if you do have a large number of enemies, you don't have to use the henchmen rules. The main point is that the GM *has* the option and rules to group henchmen enemies, where in previous editions this was not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

monkeylite said:

 

A group of 3 Marauders would get 4 Aggression dice, the same as a group of 10.

Source? Nothing in the preview or the attachment indicates this. To the contrary the actual quote is:

"Attributes. The A/C/E listing is an abbreviation for
the entry's Aggression, Cunning, and Expertise, which
provide a budget of dice the GM can use to customise
encounters."

This clearly states that the budget of dice is per entry, not per group. Again, from what we've been shown, the only thing a henchman has fewer of is wounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. You can critical at any time, rather than only when wounds equal 0.

This isn't necessary a good point. That depends on how the system use this "critical". BTW locations are gone, it seems.


2. You can fail, yet have some positive results.

This is, I hope, based on the type of action. Even in v1 or v2 a fail isn't tied to dare results.


3. You can succeed, yet have negative results.

As Above.


4. You can look at a dice roll, and the dice that make up the roll, and see what the various factors are that influence the roll itself.ù

And? Sure I must look at the dice longer, since I must decrypt verious symbols.


5. The dice pool provides a more dynamic roll than the d100

Not true. That depends how you "read" the d100 roll. A near miss, a near success, etc.


6. Character generation allows the player to tailor the PC to the concept, rather than randomly rolling and trying to make a PC out of it.

Yes. In fact you have fewer races, fewer careers fewer stats. Also, if I wanted a point-buy system Hero System is much better.


7. Party sheet, as a good way to provide the group with a known theme and bonus for being cohesive in roleplaying and working together.

This isn't necessarly a good thing. Perhaps this approach slow down game or is an unwanted/unused addition. Good old roleplay is there. No party ... sheet is needed.


8. Players can contribute cards to the party that benefit everyone, as long as they remain near the party.

Well, this is more a MMORPG/Board game mechanics. Why it's a good thing for an RPG? At will, At encounter, At Day... many of us strive to re-create a Warhammer reality. Suspension of disbilief with this types of mechanics is thrown out of the window. Not a good thing.


9. You don't need to use miniatures. While I and my group love miniatures and will probably still use miniatures, 3e gives GMs great flexibility because it has rules for running combats without miniatures. This is especially handy for larger-scale battles where moving dozens of miniatures can really bog down the game.

Even here. With/without miniatures isn't a issue for me. What I can't perceive as a good thing is battling tens of monsters that act (and feel) like one.


10. Henchmen rules to speed up massed combat. I think these are very handy, and are better than previous versions of WFRP (because they don't have them at all). The GM has the option of grouping multiple enemies for faster combat resolution

As point above. In addition, If I wanted to portray large scale battles I can use other system.
The worst thing is that wading thorugh hordes of mutants, demons and the like isn't very Warhammer. Don't you think?

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

phobiandarkmoon said:

Mal Reynolds said:

 

Loswaith said:

 

Well atleast the Designer Diary was accurate in the title, it speaks much of the way it seems Warhammer has been taken.

The one thing I realy liked about Warhammer was as a PC you are an average joe, now you arent.  Henchman AKA mooks, are way past the boundry of the game being about average people becoming more only by circumstance.

 

 

 

Don`t make me laugh? PC in warhammer the Average Joe?  What, you took away their FATE POINTS? That`s not nice. gran_risa.gif

Average people in the Warhammer world don`t have FATE POINTS, heroes and adventurers as well as certain antagonists have it, but not the average run-of-the-mill.

 

 

Aaand you spectacularly miss the point. Fate Points are the ONLY things seperating normal people from PCs/major antagonists etc, at least at first career. In something like D&D, the PCs are so ridiculously overpowered compared to NPCs that it breaks realism (not that D&D wants that, its just what made WFRP so much better in my opinion)

The henchmen rules throw enemy protagonists back into being much, much worse than the PCs. However, I do note that there was talk in the article of a non-henchman Gor vs a henchman Gor, so its an optional rule in any case - the intention is probably just to speed up large battles.

Yeah I am spectaculary guy in that way. Nice of you cutting off my remarks about Hencmen. But you agree it makes a fine tool for the GM to handle large battles? 

Example : in my game my party of relative powerful individuals, got into a conflict with regular dockworkers working as smugglers, They tried to beat of the players or overpower them with sheer numbers, it didn`t work. And why? because these where normal people run-of-the-mill guys did not want to die for the cause but could take some risks. So I decided that once they took enough damage to equal half their total wounds, they would flee.

Now how is this different than from using them as hencmen instead? not much, just game-mechanics thats all. In my 3e games I will use henchem if the situation promotes it, like in the example above. A henchmen having zero wounds left, doesn`t mean his dead, only that he is out of combat. fleeing, covering or out-cold. This is just one way of using the henchmen rule, or at least one way of looking at it. 

 

And ONLY...in my book Fate points are a big difference, the one that clearly separate Adventurers from the average Joe. No I didn`t miss the point, but maybe he I quoted in the first place missed something important from his argument. Everyone can make vallid arguments if they choose to let important things out, and I thought he did let out something important called FATE.  But maybe you react more to the tone of my post.
I admit I could have been nicer.

 

"I am no different from you Joe, its just that I can survive death 2-3 times more than you, no biggie, let`s hunt go hunting the skaven in the sewer"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Henchmen are a great option that allow GMs to introduce larger numbers of enemies or create more complex encounters without necessarily overwhelming the party."

More complex encounters such as multiple sides in a pitched battle, a mob of torch and pitchfork wielding rabble that the party rouses against the local big nasty, ship to ship combats on the high seas, prison/tax riots.  Seems like this would allow for quick resolutions of large scale scenes.  These seem like situations that were hard to run in previous editions without things bogging down or resorting to hand waving.  I like it, but I would probably use it sparingly or when my players are cold, broken, scared, alone and in need of a heroic pick me up.  =)

 

-Thorvid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DeathFromAbove said:

1. You can critical at any time, rather than only when wounds equal 0.

This isn't necessary a good point. That depends on how the system use this "critical". BTW locations are gone, it seems.


2. You can fail, yet have some positive results.

This is, I hope, based on the type of action. Even in v1 or v2 a fail isn't tied to dare results.


3. You can succeed, yet have negative results.

As Above.


4. You can look at a dice roll, and the dice that make up the roll, and see what the various factors are that influence the roll itself.ù

And? Sure I must look at the dice longer, since I must decrypt verious symbols.


5. The dice pool provides a more dynamic roll than the d100

Not true. That depends how you "read" the d100 roll. A near miss, a near success, etc.


6. Character generation allows the player to tailor the PC to the concept, rather than randomly rolling and trying to make a PC out of it.

Yes. In fact you have fewer races, fewer careers fewer stats. Also, if I wanted a point-buy system Hero System is much better.


7. Party sheet, as a good way to provide the group with a known theme and bonus for being cohesive in roleplaying and working together.

This isn't necessarly a good thing. Perhaps this approach slow down game or is an unwanted/unused addition. Good old roleplay is there. No party ... sheet is needed.


8. Players can contribute cards to the party that benefit everyone, as long as they remain near the party.

Well, this is more a MMORPG/Board game mechanics. Why it's a good thing for an RPG? At will, At encounter, At Day... many of us strive to re-create a Warhammer reality. Suspension of disbilief with this types of mechanics is thrown out of the window. Not a good thing.


9. You don't need to use miniatures. While I and my group love miniatures and will probably still use miniatures, 3e gives GMs great flexibility because it has rules for running combats without miniatures. This is especially handy for larger-scale battles where moving dozens of miniatures can really bog down the game.

Even here. With/without miniatures isn't a issue for me. What I can't perceive as a good thing is battling tens of monsters that act (and feel) like one.


10. Henchmen rules to speed up massed combat. I think these are very handy, and are better than previous versions of WFRP (because they don't have them at all). The GM has the option of grouping multiple enemies for faster combat resolution

As point above. In addition, If I wanted to portray large scale battles I can use other system.
The worst thing is that wading thorugh hordes of mutants, demons and the like isn't very Warhammer. Don't you think?

.

1. You can critical at any time, rather than only when wounds equal 0.

Well, in my view Ulric's Fury is a form of critical, so yeah, you can do that in 2E as well.


2. You can fail, yet have some positive results.
3. You can succeed, yet have negative results.

Covered in various WFRP games (which IMNSHO includes 1E, 2E, DH and RT) by the notion of degrees of success and failure as well as your +/-30 or +/-60 test modifiers from situations and what not.


4. You can look at a dice roll, and the dice that make up the roll, and see what the various factors are that influence the roll itself.ù

And? Sure I must look at the dice longer, since I must decrypt verious symbols. Imagine having to roll 6 dice each time a action is taken, by anyone, and having to stop and interpret each dice and each roll. Yeah thats so much faster then saying "hmmm I needed a 40, I rolled a 20, thats 2 degrees of success!"


5. The dice pool provides a more dynamic roll than the d100

Not true. That depends how you "read" the d100 roll. A near miss, a near success, etc. (I concur)


6. Character generation allows the player to tailor the PC to the concept, rather than randomly rolling and trying to make a PC out of it.

Something we have seen being capable of being added to WFRP game systems in DH and RT and with simple modifiers to the game (heck, RT includes a points buy optional system in it). Didnt need a complete rules rewrite (or ****).


7. Party sheet, as a good way to provide the group with a known theme and bonus for being cohesive in roleplaying and working together.

Too meta gaming for me. Party cohesion should be a aspect of role playing and player intent, not sheers and charts and graphs.


8. Players can contribute cards to the party that benefit everyone, as long as they remain near the party.

Elf needs food badly! Like this even worse then in card games, board games and video games. Again this is something that can be played out through role playing and standard actions instead of a card toss.


9. You don't need to use miniatures. While I and my group love miniatures and will probably still use miniatures, 3e gives GMs great flexibility because it has rules for running combats without miniatures. This is especially handy for larger-scale battles where moving dozens of miniatures can really bog down the game.

Most RPGs include rules for running the game without miniatures.


10. Henchmen rules to speed up massed combat. I think these are very handy, and are better than previous versions of WFRP (because they don't have them at all). The GM has the option of grouping multiple enemies for faster combat resolution

Actually, by the definitioin of WFRP versions (as stated before, DH, RT, 1E and 2E are all "versions" of WFRP) Henchmen rules do exist for DH. SO again, didnt need a complete rules rewrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loswaith said:

phobiandarkmoon said:

 

Mal Reynolds said:

 

Loswaith said:

 

Well atleast the Designer Diary was accurate in the title, it speaks much of the way it seems Warhammer has been taken.

The one thing I realy liked about Warhammer was as a PC you are an average joe, now you arent.  Henchman AKA mooks, are way past the boundry of the game being about average people becoming more only by circumstance.

  

Don`t make me laugh? PC in warhammer the Average Joe?  What, you took away their FATE POINTS? That`s not nice. gran_risa.gif

Average people in the Warhammer world don`t have FATE POINTS, heroes and adventurers as well as certain antagonists have it, but not the average run-of-the-mill.

 

 

Aaand you spectacularly miss the point. Fate Points are the ONLY things seperating normal people from PCs/major antagonists etc, at least at first career. In something like D&D, the PCs are so ridiculously overpowered compared to NPCs that it breaks realism (not that D&D wants that, its just what made WFRP so much better in my opinion)

The henchmen rules throw enemy protagonists back into being much, much worse than the PCs. However, I do note that there was talk in the article of a non-henchman Gor vs a henchman Gor, so its an optional rule in any case - the intention is probably just to speed up large battles.

 

 

 

Actually if you look at the way fate and fortune points work they are a purely out of character mechanical reason to allow players luck or to counter bad luck (in the case of death) should they want to continue playing their character. 

Trying to explain them as a feature within the world is plain silly for the most part.  A character simply gets fate points because they are being played by a player, give the same character with the same deeds as an NPC they more than likely wouldnt have fate or fortune points.

 

Again I only mentioned that his argument where flawed since, the whole equation involving Fate points / fortune points where left out. Your whole argument about Fate points being "purely out of character mechanical reason.." Doesn`t mean anything in this context. Yes it has no logical way of explaining why some have fate points and others don`t.  But as long as you have them for any reason, you are set apart from Average Joe. His argument would only be vallid if Fate points didn`t exist in the first place.

I fear that this discussion is slowly drifting over in realism vs storytelling. Real life is different from stories. And as such the game mechanics involving Fate points have no place in Realism. But in a good story I think Fate points is essential. Otherwise we would REALLY be Joe Average.

 

And the whole Henchmen thing is just a way of using game mechanics for handling combats differently. Someone might be concerned that the use of Henchmen would give off wrong signals to players, that they are superiors to others. Well in some aspects they are, when not faced with determined and skilled opponents like in my example: (another post), the dock-workers. Whatever game-mechanics I would use, the end-result would be the same. As a GM you have a responsibility when using the rules, yes using the henchmen rule too often can set off players to believe they are invincible. But if not there is no REASON why any players should think that he is better than the rest, unless ofcourse you are thinking of meta-gaming: "I know that in this game, there exist Henchmen, ergo I am better than most of my fellow man".  

Pound on this silly remark will youcool.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mal Reynolds said:

Loswaith said:

 

Well atleast the Designer Diary was accurate in the title, it speaks much of the way it seems Warhammer has been taken.

The one thing I realy liked about Warhammer was as a PC you are an average joe, now you arent.  Henchman AKA mooks, are way past the boundry of the game being about average people becoming more only by circumstance.

 

 

 

Don`t make me laugh? PC in warhammer the Average Joe?  What, you took away their FATE POINTS? That`s not nice. gran_risa.gif

Average people in the Warhammer world don`t have FATE POINTS, heroes and adventurers as well as certain antagonists have it, but not the average run-of-the-mill.

 

Henchman may not be the best concept, 3e as it reminds me very much of the minion concept in D&D. But again it make it possible to use large numbers of inferior creatuers in those dramatic combats, where you want to let the players sweat a bit. And no, I won`t tell if their henchmen or not.

 

An Apology to Loswaith

I see now in the aftermath of much frenetic writing and posting, that I came too hard at you.

And for that I am sorry . Still my arguments will remain, but the tone was...not good. I don`t usually write in such an aggresive tone, I prefer long discussions, and building up arguments with vallid opinions. It must have been one of those days...I have no explanation.


Sorry for my behavior Loswaith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

macd21 said:

Whether the henchmen are more deadly or not depends on how the defence of a character is portrayed, if its an opposed roll it may do if its simply succeeding it wont.  Either way multiple enemies each having their own chance to do something will likely result in better odds of one doing something that just one roll for many.

Multiple weak enemies may simply be unable to hurt the characters. This was a huge problem with v1 and v2. A poor opponents probably wouldn't hit, it hit it might be parried or dodged, if it still hit then its attack probably wouldn't get past the armour. With one strong roll for many, you're more likely to hit and your hit is more likely to get past the armour and toughness.

 

A bunch of weak enemies can hurt players.  The bonuses to hit for ganging up means they take a lot of hits.  Some get through.  I had PCs burn fate points over this.  Mail and plate armour work in a fairly realistic fashion in WFRP v2 and I'm really happy with that, but a system that help handle masses of weak foes is greatly appreciated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...