Warhammer frpg - 2e vs 4e

[TheSword]

The Starter Set adventure. Without getting into spoilers for that adventure, I'll drop hints. They just took a strange moonlit walk and ran into some questionable shifty folks.
With another group a couple years ago I ran the first two chapters of Enemy in Shadows before people moved and the game fell apart.

Nice. I’m going to start Enemy Within with If Looks Could Kill just before the Coach and Horses. My plan is to weave Oldenhaller Contract into Enemy Within set in Altdorf and replace the Valentina’s etc with the Hooks and Fishes. I think getting on the wrong side of those two gangs is a much better reason to flee Altdorf than the existing reason. Plus it means I can run Night at the Opera some time and bring back Oldenhaller. I can’t wait to run that adventure.

 

[Retreater]

Nice. I’m going to start Enemy Within with If Looks Could Kill just before the Coach and Horses. My plan is to weave Oldenhaller Contract into Enemy Within set in Altdorf and replace the Valentina’s etc with the Hooks and Fishes. I think getting on the wrong side of those two gangs is a much better reason to flee Altdorf than the existing reason. Plus it means I can run Night at the Opera some time and bring back Oldenhaller. I can’t wait to run that adventure.

That sounds great. There's so many fantastic adventures and settings to explore, I would be intimidated trying to add more to Enemy Within. Even the companion books have so much. I'm concerned that if I add much more I will overwhelm my players. Even with the Starter Set they were imagining conspiracies and intricate plots and getting decision paralysis.

 

[TheSword]

That sounds great. There's so many fantastic adventures and settings to explore, I would be intimidated trying to add more to Enemy Within. Even the companion books have so much. I'm concerned that if I add much more I will overwhelm my players. Even with the Starter Set they were imagining conspiracies and intricate plots and getting decision paralysis.

I get you. The companions are packed. My plan is to add things that complement, otherwise stick to the plan.

For instance I’ve always thought Joseph Quartjin kinda pops out of nowhere in Altdorf so I’m going to have the Berebli be the ship that takes them downriver in Looks Could Kill. Try and build a bit of rapport earlier.

 

[CapnZapp]

I do think you can break the game that way though. I don’t think a game should have to physically make that impossible to not be a crappy game. It was the same with every edition of WFRP and Dark Heresy.

It needn't be "physically impossible". It should definitely be expensive, and require painful sacrifice elsewhere. That's just not the case in WFRP4.

I can't speak of Dark Heresy, but WFRP2 does not allow you to trivially boost your Fellowship score, for instance, to completely short-circuit the social aspects of the game. More importantly, as long as you don't base your resolution outcomes entirely on "degrees of success" (2E's term for Success Levels) it's fine to pitch 80% Charm against 30% Willpower (or whatever is suitable for the encounter at hand). It is the combination of allowing players to boost individual skill scores without having to also increase other related values AND the opposed test system that truly breaks the game.

This is not a case of a munchkin merely putting all her XP into Charm/Fellowship at the expense of never leaving her initial career. This will happen naturally to balanced players that just are never held back by the system, players that might not realize the game isn't equipped for the very natural choices the game allows them to make. (Here I'm referring to the fact that while heroes in D&D gain very high attack scores, for instance, that is never a gameplay issue since the foes you are supposed to fight gain very high Armor Class scores. But WFRP4 monsters and NPCs just never are designed with this in mind; almost as if the creatures are written with 2E in mind, completely unawares that the system has abandoned most every check and balance...)

Unlike most games I've encountered WFRP4 does break the game. It's a glaring flaw, and one that didn't need to be there. But still - had this been one out of a few areas where WFRP4 did something wonky or bad compared to other games it would be fine. Especially if it also did some or many things right or better than the alternatives.

Since my comprehensive coverage of the game has shown me that it does not do that - almost every single thing added by 4E not already present in the Warhammer lineup makes my WFRP experience worse: slower, more complex, fiddly, hard, changing the way the world works in ways I don't appreciate, and/or outright broken - I can't find any argument to play it. It's an example of irredeemable effort.

That is, any argument other than possibly "it's there" (and its cousin "I like physical books and can't find a used copy of WFRP2 conveniently enough"). Even there I sincerely recommend you look elsewhere. Just to repeat a single suggestion: the Warlock! game from Fire Ruby designs.

As for the argument "since there exists people liking WFRP4 Zapp must be wrong" you will simply have to watch me shrug. I am not going to enter the rabbit hole of trying to understand every person. Besides I would struggle to find nice things to say of their behavior anyway.

Have a nice day

 

[Ancalagon]

Normal SL: Tens of your skill minus the tens of your roll. So if you have a skill of 54 and roll 12, your SL is 5-1= 4.

Fast SL: On a success, SL is the tens of your roll. So if you have a skill of 54 and roll 12, your SL is 1. On a failure, as normal.

One requires subtraction which takes time, the other just checking the die result. From an aesthetic perspective, one might prefer that SL be connected to the margin of success, but the probabilities are similar if not identical (fast gives you more SL 0, normal gives you more maxed SL).

ah, so SL is "success levels". So under normal SL rules, you want to roll as low as possible. If your Skill is 43, rolling 01 is the best. Under fast SL, the best roll would be 42 (43?), so you want to roll as high as possible without going over your skill. Did I get that right?

 

[Ancalagon]

My biggest issue with the game is that if you’re an optimizer you can break the system. If your players are going to ignore the lore and are the type to squeeze every ounce out of a ‘build’ they’ve found on the internet or select the most powerful talents multiple times and ignore the rest, then they will rip the game apart. It’s been the same for every edition of WFRP, in fact every d100 game I’ve ever seen.

I am baffled by this comment. You don't have "builds" in warhammer 2e. You can't. You don't choose your stats, you don't even choose your starting career!

Sure, you can improve some stats before others (WS is usually a good idea). there are a few choices between talents. You can also pick your next career, although it may not be the one you really want. But we are miles from 5e/3e/PF 's "builds".

I'll also note that in 2e, your skill levels and ability levels were capped by your career. So if you were a ratcatcher, you could improve your WS by 5% (if memory serves). If you wanted a better WS, you needed to switch to a new career, and to do that you had to "complete" your current career, so it was impossible to just chase one skill/ability and ignore all the others.

Have things changed that much in 4e?

 

[TheSword]

I am baffled by this comment. You don't have "builds" in warhammer 2e. You can't. You don't choose your stats, you don't even choose your starting career!

Sure, you can improve some stats before others (WS is usually a good idea). there are a few choices between talents. You can also pick your next career, although it may not be the one you really want. But we are miles from 5e/3e/PF 's "builds".

I'll also note that in 2e, your skill levels and ability levels were capped by your career. So if you were a ratcatcher, you could improve your WS by 5% (if memory serves). If you wanted a better WS, you needed to switch to a new career, and to do that you had to "complete" your current career, so it was impossible to just chase one skill/ability and ignore all the others.

Have things changed that much in 4e?

So in 4e characteristics are still linked to career, but they’re not capped. So you can invest in a single stat - at diminishing returns in XP. Those diminishing returns are severe though. Going from 31 to 32 cost four times as much as going from 7 to 8. Going from 56 to 57 costs eleven times as much.

By build, I mean creating a character as a one trick pony, specifically choosing combinations of talents, equipment and skills/stats to maximize an effect. I don’t like it, but I see it as an unavoidable consequence of giving people choice.

It is heavily discouraged by the diminishing returns but it is possible. It’s also where I see a lot of the broken maths that Zapp is talking about.

 

[TheSword]

It needn't be "physically impossible". It should definitely be expensive, and require painful sacrifice elsewhere. That's just not the case in WFRP4.

I can't speak of Dark Heresy, but WFRP2 does not allow you to trivially boost your Fellowship score, for instance, to completely short-circuit the social aspects of the game. More importantly, as long as you don't base your resolution outcomes entirely on "degrees of success" (2E's term for Success Levels) it's fine to pitch 80% Charm against 30% Willpower (or whatever is suitable for the encounter at hand). It is the combination of allowing players to boost individual skill scores without having to also increase other related values AND the opposed test system that truly breaks the game.

This is not a case of a munchkin merely putting all her XP into Charm/Fellowship at the expense of never leaving her initial career. This will happen naturally to balanced players that just are never held back by the system, players that might not realize the game isn't equipped for the very natural choices the game allows them to make. (Here I'm referring to the fact that while heroes in D&D gain very high attack scores, for instance, that is never a gameplay issue since the foes you are supposed to fight gain very high Armor Class scores. But WFRP4 monsters and NPCs just never are designed with this in mind; almost as if the creatures are written with 2E in mind, completely unawares that the system has abandoned most every check and balance...)

Unlike most games I've encountered WFRP4 does break the game. It's a glaring flaw, and one that didn't need to be there. But still - had this been one out of a few areas where WFRP4 did something wonky or bad compared to other games it would be fine. Especially if it also did some or many things right or better than the alternatives.

Since my comprehensive coverage of the game has shown me that it does not do that - almost every single thing added by 4E not already present in the Warhammer lineup makes my WFRP experience worse: slower, more complex, fiddly, hard, changing the way the world works in ways I don't appreciate, and/or outright broken - I can't find any argument to play it. It's an example of irredeemable effort.

That is, any argument other than possibly "it's there" (and its cousin "I like physical books and can't find a used copy of WFRP2 conveniently enough"). Even there I sincerely recommend you look elsewhere. Just to repeat a single suggestion: the Warlock! game from Fire Ruby designs.

As for the argument "since there exists people liking WFRP4 Zapp must be wrong" you will simply have to watch me shrug. I am not going to enter the rabbit hole of trying to understand every person. Besides I would struggle to find nice things to say of their behavior anyway.

Have a nice day

Let’s just agree to disagree then. We’re both just making assertions at this point. Nice to day to you!

 

[Ancalagon]

So in 4e characteristics are still linked to career, but they’re not capped. So you can invest in a single stat - at diminishing returns in XP. Those diminishing returns are severe though. Going from 31 to 32 cost four times as much as going from 7 to 8. Going from 56 to 57 costs eleven times as much.

By build, I mean creating a character as a one trick pony, specifically choosing combinations of talents, equipment and skills/stats to maximize an effect. I don’t like it, but I see it as an unavoidable consequence of giving people choice.

It is heavily discouraged by the diminishing returns but it is possible. It’s also where I see a lot of the broken maths that Zapp is talking about.

This sounds like a clear downgrade form 2e then... ie it's a problem that 4e made possible?

 

[Retreater]

So my history with WFRP was I played a bit of 1e, purchased 2e and still have my hardcover books in great shape (because I never got to play it). I tried 3e and didn't like it. And 4e ... well, I love the feel of the setting, really want to play The Enemy Within, but the rules are seeming like a stumbling block.
So this morning I'm cracking open the 2e core book and bestiary and wondering "why haven't I tried this version yet?" I'm really debating doing a trial adventure in 2e and seeing if the players prefer that version to 4e before we begin The Enemy Within.