That's very generous. Most of the mechanical issues (with the exception of character creation) is largely being handled by automation on Foundry. But if after having a talk with my players and they are interested in this option, I will certainly let you know.Hey. If it's primarily the mechanics of WFRP that you're butting up against, PM me your email address and I'll set you up with a free copy of Small But Vicious Hack (my WFRP-alike, but complete in two pages).
Sounds like a great idea, and I'd love to try something like that. Unfortunately, the combat in the WFRP system is so punishing that casual fights just can't happen. You can get an injury with one attack from a basic 0-level brigand that sidelines you for weeks of the campaign (if not permanently debilitating you or killing you outright). As a system, you just can't use it for action-based games like Pathfinder or D&D.
In previous sessions I've let the characters push combats, starting fights when they weren't necessary or pursuing enemies who were already retreating in hopes of getting loot. They are newer players to RPGs in general, with most of their experience being in 5e, so I understand the disconnect between the system's expectations and what they want to do. Even though at Session Zero I tried to explain this to them, I think they had to see it in action.I am familiar with wfrp and agree it is punishing. It is a major factor in why I love it.
It is certainly hard to run it if you are worried about the combat. Are you worried about how members of the group will deal with said punishment? Are you concerned about how injuries may sideline the story? I don’t think either of these are the root problem you are facing, but if they are contributing factors it would seem like changing rulesets is advisable for this group.
I would love to run Enemy Within someday… for the right group. No sense slogging through it with a group that isn’t enjoying it and make it less fun for yourself as well.
Yes. I have it, though I was never able to play it. Still have my hard copies and a load of PDFs from a recent Humble Bundle.In fact, did you ever see WFRP 2e from Green Ronin? Still pretty deadly, but damn! I loved that system.
Yeah, that's a clear message! And as a GM it is FRUSTRATING. When this happens to me, it always feels personal.But if they can't be bothered to right down the names of their main suspects in a demonic cult investigation that is poised to bring about the destruction of the city in a matter of days, why should I bother? It's clearly not connecting with them, and I doubt if changing systems would impact that much.
it really does sound like they want a fairly simple fight game, what used to be referred as a beer and pretzels type campaign. A fairly railroady D&D campaign, Not "The Enemy Within"Yes. I have it, though I was never able to play it. Still have my hard copies and a load of PDFs from a recent Humble Bundle.
The benefit of sticking with the current edition would be that I get to use the books I've already bought (which are like 10 volumes of this campaign) and it's all automated on Foundry.
Converting it to Savage Worlds or a previous edition would be work. Then putting all that in Foundry would be additional work. Plus teaching the players a new system.
I mean, absolutely yes, I will do it if they want to stick with the campaign. But if they can't be bothered to right down the names of their main suspects in a demonic cult investigation that is poised to bring about the destruction of the city in a matter of days, why should I bother? It's clearly not connecting with them, and I doubt if changing systems would impact that much.
And if you're not getting into the story, mystery, and politics of The Enemy Within, I don't think there's a point. It's like trying to play Tomb of Horrors without traps.
I would not take it as personal but more of a playstyle/expectations mismatch.Yeah, that's a clear message! And as a GM it is FRUSTRATING. When this happens to me, it always feels personal.
I can be comfortable in a variety of styles. I just don't want to be running the wrong game for the wrong playstyle. I can adapt easier if the system and the campaign adventure aren't in opposition to what the players want.it really does sound like they want a fairly simple fight game, what used to be referred as a beer and pretzels type campaign. A fairly railroady D&D campaign, Not "The Enemy Within"
I don't know if your are comfortable with that type of campaign though. There may a playstyle mismatch at work here.
Sometimes the players need to have these growing pains to find out. It can be hard because GMs and players are often at different points in this journey. This might be them wanting the classic D&D experience, or them trying to get out of their comfort zone and look around.I can be comfortable in a variety of styles. I just don't want to be running the wrong game for the wrong playstyle. I can adapt easier if the system and the campaign adventure aren't in opposition to what the players want.
As I've told them, I'd be happy to run them with 5e, OSR, Pathfinder, etc. They just need to tell me what they want to play.
Aside from Frostmaiden was this group involved in any other of the AP's you have run, any you consider successful?I can be comfortable in a variety of styles. I just don't want to be running the wrong game for the wrong playstyle. I can adapt easier if the system and the campaign adventure aren't in opposition to what the players want.
As I've told them, I'd be happy to run them with 5e, OSR, Pathfinder, etc. They just need to tell me what they want to play.
We've had a few successful games. Some of it was homebrew 5e. But they did enjoy Curse of Strahd.Aside from Frostmaiden was this group involved in any other of the AP's you have run, any you consider successful?
(Hiya, and thanks! Since I took a break from ENW I've written two GUMSHOE games, run two 10-yr-long D&D campaigns (and started two more Swords of the Serpentine campaigns), played and run a TON of indie RPGs, watched 124 crappy shark movies (all during the pandemic), and played in a weekly 5e game. I'm lucky, and in a good gaming place. It's good be back home, even if I'm mostly in the not-D&D forum right now.)Welcome back, not see you post in a long time.
I can't help but think we'd be having a better time doing something else. In this case, would you put your foot down and say you want to run another game once we get to a good stopping point (probably in 1 or 2 sessions anyway)? Would you let them keep playing it this way, being frustrated? Would you try to do even less hand-holding and just let them fail?