Review of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay

[RyanD]

alright. but there are various factors here.

I think the quotes I'm going to make responses to are a great example of someone who wanted to be offended reading things into my review which were not there, and then misremembering them to build a logic chain to reach a pre-determined conclusion. As such, I think it is a good example of how inaccurate much of this negative criticism has been.

Let me respond in detail.

like the statement that warhammer is just another fantasy world with an added chaos element

I never made such a statement.

I did say: "The Warhammer Fantasy world is a variant of Europe."

Do you really want to argue with that conclusion?

I also wrote: "Warhammer Fantasy is a large, well loved, and richly detailed world"

or that the majority of it was derivative from another game system.

1) No matter how you slice it, WFRP(new) is a nearly total derivative of something. The only material indicated as wholly new by the designer is the magic system. It's either a derivative of D&D(new), WFRP(old) (it in turn an acknowleged derivative of D&D(old)), or a derivative of a basket of games produced in the years since WFRP(old) was developed. But I will not accept the whitewash argument that it's "not derivative". Or that calling it "derivative" was intended as an insult to anyone. Nobody involved with WFRP(new) could or would attempt to pass the work off as wholly original. Getting upset about the term "derivative" being used in the review is and was a smokescreen.

2) You may have an opinion about the extent to which WFRP(new) is derivative of D&D 3E, as do I. Neither of us has the ability to factually prove the point one way or the other. You can disagree with my opinion in a logical way and I'll be happy to entertain your logical argument. I hope that you would extend the same courtesy to me. You cannot however, simply state that I am wrong based on the facts, because there are no facts on which we can draw other than the written words in the book and the history of the people involved. I feel comfortable that I can respond effectively with evidence and game theory to support my conclusion that "The Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay game shares many similar design goals to D&D 3rd Edition, and uses a "basket" of mechanics and mechanical design choices that are clearly influenced by the design of D&D 3rd Edition." And so I stand by that statement in the review.

I did not change my review to remove the word "derivative" because I feel that that word was used inaccurately. I changed it because the word engendered enough negative reaction leading to a mis-interpretation of my opinion of the work to make changing the review worthwhile to ensure my actual opinion was being transmitted effectively.

if someone implies, as ryan did, that D&D left more space for character development

I wrote: "In a nutshell, this system allows a player to customize the PC by taking bits and pieces of various "classes" and accumulating them at a slow, but steady rate, incrementally. This is a very flexible approach to character generation and will result in a wide variety of character abilities and ability levels."

and

"The range of templates is wide and varied, from the mundane to the mystical. Clearly a lot of history and a lot of thought has gone into the preparation of the templates, and the result will be a fantasy world populated by a diverse cast of characters who are much more descriptively detailed than the generic characters that populate most D20 System worlds."

I'll just consider your argument on this point refuted and move on.

accusing the monster book to lack a treasure table, for example, misses the point of warhammer completely.

In my review I indicated that my problem with the product was that it abused the purchaser by delivering poor value for the money. It is encumbant on me, as a reveiewer, to provide some insight on how more value could have been provided, and I did so. I believe that "treasure tables" would, and will be, useful to the person using the book to run WFRP(new), and I stand by my suggestion that they'd be useful.

My opinion about the problem with the book is this:

"In a 128 page book, 5 pages are consumed with zero usable content of any kind (full page "art" that isn't art), the credits, index and "intro" consume 3 pages, 6 pages are 3/4 filled with art, and 1 pages self-references the "flavor" portion in "flavor text" - i.e. 11% of the book has no value to the purchaser."

Had less space been wasted elsewhere, I'd have been less critical of stuff like the credits page, or the ad on the last page as they are somewhat industry standard. Given the state of the whole work however, the waste of space including those pages was relevant to my review as to the value of the work.

What's your opinion of the value of the book based on its use of its page count? How does this book compare to other 128 page books? How does it compare to other products at a similar price point? Are you seriously going to argue that given the state of the industry and the contents of this book that you got fair value for your purchase?

If you want to argue with my review, argue with my stated opinion about the work, not some harmless suggestion on how to improve it - it's a suggestion for utility, not a dissertation on how WFRP is supposed to be played. Do you have suggestions on how to improve the work? That might be a fruitful conversation. Or do you think paying $30 for that book was "just right" and you'd advise others to feel the same way? That would be a useful data point to know as well.

In conclusion, I'd like to say that at GenCon I had a chance to congradulate the team at Games Workshop on the product line, and express my personal pleasure at the WFRP(new) book to them directly, and compliment them on the ENies they received. I was glad to hear that sales continue to be strong, and that the line has widespread appeal. I look forward to seeing many interesting works in the line in the future.


Ryan

 

[RangerWickett]

Yeah, but D&D sucks, and you compared Warhammer to D&D, so obviously you must suck too.

Ryan, while attempting to refute the arguments with logic is noble, it will generally be futile.

 

[Turjan]

"In a 128 page book, 5 pages are consumed with zero usable content of any kind (full page "art" that isn't art)...

As someone who hasn't seen the 'Bestiary' yet, I'm just curious: What is meant with "full page "art" that isn't art?" Is it some photograph of Warhammer minis, or how do I have to understand this?

And what is meant by "65 pages of average or below-average quality, stream of conscious, intentionally error-riddled fiction", and here the "intentionally error-riddled" part? Fiction that contains intentional errors? I have honestly no idea.


Edit: I don't mind if someone else who knows that book provides an answer or at least an educated guess .

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I've only got WFRP in it's original form, but isn't it derived almost entirely from WFB? The stat block is basically the same as the one in the wargame but with some values taken to 1-100 instead of 1-10. I never got the impression that WFRP was derived from AD&D in any real way other than it was a FRPG.

 

[Nikchick]

In conclusion, I'd like to say that at GenCon I had a chance to congradulate the team at Games Workshop on the product line, and express my personal pleasure at the WFRP(new) book to them directly, and compliment them on the ENies they received.

That was awfully nice of you. I'm sure the Sabertooth reps appreciated that, though the role Sabertooth plays in the WFRP line primarily selling the finished product (except for Kate Flack, who was the only member of Black Industries at the show).

Did you find time to stop at the Green Ronin booth and talk to the authors, line developer or art director to congratulate them on their work as well? The couple of times I saw you go past you seemed to be focused on getting somewhere else in a bit of a hurry, but I was running Blue Rose games for most of the con and may have missed you.

 

[Akrasia]

As someone who hasn't seen the 'Bestiary' yet, I'm just curious: What is meant with "full page "art" that isn't art?" Is it some photograph of Warhammer minis, or how do I have to understand this?

And what is meant by "65 pages of average or below-average quality, stream of conscious, intentionally error-riddled fiction", and here the "intentionally error-riddled" part? Fiction that contains intentional errors? I have honestly no idea.


Edit: I don't mind if someone else who knows that book provides an answer or at least an educated guess .

I have the book, and really love it. IMO it is one of the best 'monster books' ever produced.

There are no photographs of Warhammer minis. There is one page that has a faux cover for the first part of the book called "Perilous Beasts: A Study of Creatures Fair and Foul". In that part of the book there are different (some intentionally 'error-riddled') accounts of the different kinds of beasts found in the Old World. These 'first person' descriptions are broken down into different categories: "Common View"; "The Scholar's Eye"; and "Our Own Words". It is excellent flavour text, and gives you different accounts of the creatures to give to the players, based on their knowledge level.

There is also a page devoted to a faux back cover of the first part (leather looking page with the symbol of Sigmar).

The space may have been better used, but it is forgivable in an otherwise so excellent product.

 

[RyanD]

Did you find time to stop at the Green Ronin booth and talk to the authors, line developer or art director to congratulate them on their work as well?

You, Chris, and everyone else listed on the credits page of the product at Green Ronin have my thanks for writing such a great product. I'm looking forward to having an opportunity to play it in some depth either this summer or this fall. Great work to all involved.

Ryan

 

[RyanD]

What is meant with "full page "art" that isn't art?"

The "non-crunch" portions of the work are bounded at beginning and end with full-page images that are meant to look like the covers of a tattered folio, supposedly the notes of a famous sage who collected the work within.

And what is meant by "65 pages of average or below-average quality, stream of conscious, intentionally error-riddled fiction", and here the "intentionally error-riddled" part? Fiction that contains intentional errors? I have honestly no idea.

The "non-crunch" part of the book is presented from three viewpoints: That of the common man, that of the sages, and that of the creatures themselves. Per the intro material, we are lead to understand that not all of this material is accurate, and indeed, it often contradicts itself. This is, I suppose, to preserve an air of mystery for the GM's use.

Most of the sections of the text in the "non-crunch" section is a (long) paragraph or two in length, often captured mid-stream as part of an excerpt from a "longer narrative" (of which we of course are not able to read). As a result, the text is choppy, disorganized, and often non-linear. This is not a mistake, or sloppy editing, or other professional lapse - it was clearly the itent of the writers/designers to present the material in this fashion. If you enjoy that kind of thing (and I know many people do) it won't bother you, and may enrich the experience. It certainly has the added benefit that you can pick the book up, turn to virtually any page, and read a random section without having to worry about the context. It would be a good book to read on a bus, or between periods in school, or other places where long stretches of uninterrupted reading would be inappropriate.

 

[Turjan]

There are no photographs of Warhammer minis. There is one page that has a faux cover for the first part of the book called "Perilous Beasts: A Study of Creatures Fair and Foul". In that part of the book there are different (some intentionally 'error-riddled') accounts of the different kinds of beasts found in the Old World. These 'first person' descriptions are broken down into different categories: "Common View"; "The Scholar's Eye"; and "Our Own Words". It is excellent flavour text, and gives you different accounts of the creatures to give to the players, based on their knowledge level.

Ah, thanks. No Warhammer minis, good . The part with the different view angles seems good for knowledge checks. Does this make mechanical differences if the players get different answers, or is it only something for the DM to chuckle?

 

[Turjan]

The "non-crunch" portions of the work are bounded at beginning and end with full-page images that are meant to look like the covers of a tattered folio, supposedly the notes of a famous sage who collected the work within.

Thanks. Maybe I'll have a closer look at that.

The "non-crunch" part of the book is presented from three viewpoints: That of the common man, that of the sages, and that of the creatures themselves. Per the intro material, we are lead to understand that not all of this material is accurate, and indeed, it often contradicts itself. This is, I suppose, to preserve an air of mystery for the GM's use.

This air of mystery can make the world interesting. This was one of the positive points of the Scarred Lands setting, where the information always differed, depending on the people telling the story. Later, they introduced much too many certainties, which was one reason for the downfall of that setting. Okay, that has nothing to do with WFRP .

Most of the sections of the text in the "non-crunch" section is a (long) paragraph or two in length, often captured mid-stream as part of an excerpt from a "longer narrative" (of which we of course are not able to read). As a result, the text is choppy, disorganized, and often non-linear. This is not a mistake, or sloppy editing, or other professional lapse - it was clearly the itent of the writers/designers to present the material in this fashion. If you enjoy that kind of thing (and I know many people do) it won't bother you, and may enrich the experience.

I have monster books that seem similar to that, with monster descriptions, some stories interspersed and the statistics somewhere in the corners. I quite like that, makes the monsters come alive . I don't use that many non-humanoid monsters, anyway, so it doesn't really bother me if it takes a minute longer to gather the core info. Of course, I have first to take a look at how it's organized in the 'Bestiary'.