tarchon said:
inheritance from 3E is paltry, no more than the level of derivation than many have seen in 3E from the 1st ed WFRP.
Other than the non-cyclic combat initiative system, the combat action system, the division of character abilities into skills & feats (talents), the use of a unified die rolling mechanic, the effort to make a unified target number convention (in this case, lower is almost always better), the increment to all system values in 5% degrees, and so on, right?
[edit: rsd -- I'm repeatedly and reliably informed that Advanced Classes predate 3E and are a reasonable potential ancestor for the Prestige Class concept, so I removed them from the above list of similarities. We'll say instead that 3E and WFRP share the feature in common, with preference to WFRP's chronology. Thanks to all who responded to this point.]
In the setting description, it also seems to have completely sailed over the author's head that "the Empire" is a reflection of the Holy Roman Empire, not "Germany."
"Modern" Gemany:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:De-map.png
Is a closer geographic model to the Empire than the Holy Roman Empire:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Western_empire_verdun_843.png
(which included much of the Czech Republic, Austria, Liechtenstein, Slovenia, Belgium, and Luxembourg, as well as large parts of modern Poland and small parts of the Netherlands, Switzerland, and parts of France and Italy.)
My intention in discussing the geography of the Empire (the portion from which you are discussing) was simply to give the reader the information that the "world" of Warhammer Fantasy is a reasonably close facsimilie to our own, rather than a completely imaginary place like Middle Earth or Faerun, for example. I did describe at some length the social/political/religious makeup of The Empire to make clear I was not comparing it to modern Germany (or even Bismarkian Germany).
The example demonstrating how the mechanics of the system are "identical" to D20's is highly questionable:
Other than being mechanically accurate, you mean, right?
do I have to point out the obvious, that in a percentile system, that only happens a fifth of the time?
You begin the character creation process by rolling 2d10 and adding a constant (10, 20 or 30) based on your race for each major attribute. The example in the book is a starting Elf PC with an attribute score of 41.
If the author had understood the system better, the author would also have realized that one of the key differences between D20 and WFRP mechanics is the higher granularity and more limited dynamic range of WFRP stats.
This is an illusion. WFRP simply doesn't account for a range of characters across as large a spectrum as D&D does
in its core book (I assume you mean "D&D" not "D20", for obvious reasons.)
The example Elf in the book, if he/she becomes a Master Thief, could aspire to an Agility of 81% (41% base plus 40% from the template). That's the equivilent of a +16 bonus in D&D - i.e. an 13th level PC with a linked ability score of 10. (If we assume an ability score of 18 base for our "Elf Master Thief", and a +2 inherent bonus from levelling, that's the equivilent of a 9th level D&D PC. (Max skill ranks of level +3, base of +4, inherent +2).
At the rate of XP awards (100XP per 4 hour session) recommended as the baseline in WFRP, it would require 360 sessions to reach 9th level. It would require 780 sessions to reach 13th level. I've played a lot of D&D. I doubt strongly I've ever played the same character 360 times. So you're right - in practice, these nosebleed values won't be reached by WFRP characters. Not because the system doesn't support/allow them, but because the players will likely chew their own limbs off in boredom before they get there.
Faster advancement in D&D is a set of choices - reward vs. effort. WFRP delivers less reward for the same effort. That just creates a different facade on the same treadmill.
The inflated ability scores that appear in D&D are an artifact of magic items, and while magic items are limited by fiat in WFRP, there's no mechanical reason I couldn't load my WFRP character down with as much phat loot as my D&D character. I can accomplish the same thing in a D&D campaign by fiat just as easily. And many people do.
There's no mechanical reason a PC in WFRP couldn't have an score of 200% (or more). The fact that it does not feature such bonuses is a design
presentation choice, not a design
mechanical choice.
In D20, there's much more of an all-or-nothing effect, just because it doesn't have that little bit of odd slop in the WFRP percentiles.
I agree: D&D does not have the odd extra once-in-fifty die roll failures that WFRP does. I don't see this as a design feature or penalty, just a quirk.
WFRP does not have saving throws at all.
Almost without exception, when a spell effect is used against a target, the target is affected by the spell if, and only if, it fails a test. That's a saving throw.
Fear and Terror tests are explicitly defined in-game effects which require the target to make a successfull roll or take a penalty. That's a saving throw.
When poisoned, characters take Toughness Tests to determine severity and effect. That's a saving throw.
Just because the mechanic isn't labelled "Saving Throw", and presented as three standardized types doesn't mean it's not present. Had it been present, in fact, a lot of extra words could have been stripped from the template (used in the "editing" sense, not the character advancement sense) - i.e., Saving Throws in D20 are a "macro", in WFRP, they're spelled out every time they're required. And they're required all the time.
The overall impression I get from this review is that it's mostly Ryan Dancey's soapbox to convince us that D20 is the font of all gaming.
To be honest, the point of the review was to talk about a product I found to be quite exceptional in many positive ways. I hope people buy & play it.
Ryan
. Not too surprising, though, given some of the roots of d20.
