Warhammer 3e Demo Experiences -OR- How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bits

I'll preface this by saying that I'm a HUGE fan of WHFRP2. During the latter half of the dark years 3.x was king (2005-2008 or so), my groups got our fantasy fix from WHFRP2. We had a ton of fun with the system, so when they announced WHFRP3, I was skeptical.

I bought a boxed set last week, and read it through, then ran a session this last weekend. All I can say is WOW! This is an amazing system, highly innovative, and very true to the Warhammer Old World. It does things a little differently than WHFRP2, but its still a grim world of perilous adventure. In the old WHFRP2, you really only had to worry about two negative consequences for a character, injury/crits/death and insanity. In WHFRP3, fatigue, stress, strain, crits, and insanity are all possible, and it takes a pretty careful balancing act to keep a character alive. PCs (and most NPCs) won't be killed by one blow, but the system is very deadly. In the game I ran Saturday night, one PC out of four died in a beastman ambush, and other had suffered 3 critical hits that put him out of action for around a week. The stance track is also a great innovation and adds a whole new dimension to character actions and roleplaying. While I was a little worried the dice would be troublesome, after about an hour of play everyone understood it and really liked the whole success/failure, boon/bane system. The cards and their variable effects based on the numbers of successes, boons, and banes are a lot of fun too, and since the system is a little more open to interpretation, I let my players describe the effects of boons/banes, which really immersed them in the game.

The only thing I miss from WHFRP2 is the vast number of careers and some of the religions/colleges of magic. However, this looks to be remedied over time, and its painfully easy to translate old careers and spells into the new system. Anyone who says this is just a boardgame clearly hasn't read the rules or played WHFRP3 yet. It doesn't try to be WHFRP2- it is its own beast, but in spite of that it still captures the feel of the old WHFRP games. Overall, its a great system that is tons of fun, and deserves to be judged on its own merits, rather than preconceived notions of "what WHFRP is supposed to be". (Gee, that sounds familiar for some reason). ;)
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Briefly looked at the box and contents at Games Plus on Friday. Content quality looks great though I'm concerned how much the booklets might suffer wear and tear. When I cracked open the caster book, I found the rules quite intimidating looking, though maybe i was just frazzed from black Friday driving. Honk! Honk! Squeeeeel.. CRUNCH!:confused:

A steep learning curve can be surmountable, and the game has old world flavor up the wazoo. My main concern was and still is though the lack of tactical placement in minis based combat. Big fan of that, though it's not for everyone since making a single mistake of moving an inch too far can easily kill someone and or the whole group as the foes funnel in through the gap. But the Conservative / Reckless stance system sounds like it might be a respectable replacement.

I'll be splitting the cost with another gaming group member for the box.
 
Last edited:

So, my take on things after a quick read of this entire thread is that opinion is sharply divided--among people who haven't actually tried the game. Among those who have, it's (not without exception) very positive.

And very much "it's an RPG, not a board game."

Can't wait to try it myself!

Funny, that almost perfectly describes a lot of the early D&D 4th edition chatter. And to only a slightly less perfect extent describes the early D&D 3rd edition chatter as well.

Not that that means anything one way or another. It's also probably prudent to point out the likelihood of selection bias-- i.e. that those who sought out the demo were likely disproportionately in favor of the game before trying it.
 

It's also probably prudent to point out the likelihood of selection bias-- i.e. that those who sought out the demo were likely disproportionately in favor of the game before trying it.

Acknowledged. Still, even among a predisposed sample, a strong positive reaction can be meaningful. If the game sucked, or was truly boardgamey, or was just meh (especially at its price point), I'd expect to see signs of that through the bias.

I'm certainly not saying it's for everyone (what game is?). I guess my point is that, when a game makes a radical departure from the norm like this, it's worth checking out before making up your mind. And when the majority of the people who have checked it out are saying good things, that might carry more weight than the naysaying of those who haven't. . .
 

I'm concerned how much the booklets might suffer wear and tear.

Since I expect the base rules to get a lot of use, I'm going to protect mine with one of these:
yhst-86010520917321_2065_3713772



Back in the 1E D&D days, we used to make book covers out of paper grocery bags and decorate them with all manner of gaming graffiti..

jh
 


Heh....

Things are getting heated...

Counterpoint from FFG about an ICV2 review of WHFRP3E

Ok, I never once saw the 4e D&D designers come out this strongly against a review...

Translation:
"We want our game to be controversial, but if you don't like it you suck. It is supposed to be a controversy with just one side to it... the side of servile flattery."

Also, "Our game is so innovative that everyone loves it and the reason this guy gave a negative review is because of a sour grapes conflict of interest liar liar pants on fire how's my Al Franken impression liar liar!"

My impression of FFG has gone into the toilet lately, and this childish screed by their CEO only makes it worse. If this is what their CEO is like I can only imagine the attitude of the company's employees.
 


I have to agree with his main point though that the reviewer has not played the game. I find such reviews worthless. It would be tantamount to a movie reviewer seeing the trailer and writing his review.
 

Remove ads

Top