Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Akrasia" data-source="post: 2496641" data-attributes="member: 23012">Well the fact that all of the main rules in 2e WFRP are based upon the main rules in 1e WFRP (except for the magic system) is very clear.  It is clear to anyone passingly familiar with 1e, and is mentioned by Chris Pramas himself in his designer notes.  For some reason though, the review claims that many core elements of 2e WFRP are based on 3e D&D.  One example, which I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, is the WFRP system of skills and talents.  Dancey claims that this system is based on 3e, whereas in reality most of the skills and talents in 2e were (in a slightly different form) already present in 1e.  The main difference is that in 1e they were all just lumped together as 'skills'.  I suppose that the 2e distinction between 'skills' (scalable) and 'talents' (nonscalable) resembles the distinction between skills and feats in 3e -- but this distinction between these two different kinds of PC abilities predates 3e by decades (e.g. see GURPS).  Some more picky points from the review:“This is further facilitated by the fact that most percentile values in the game are evenly divisible by 5, and external effects are presented in increments evenly divided by 5 as well, allowing fast, on-the-fly conversions without a lot of prep work.”A minor point, but strictly speaking, this isn’t true.  The core ability scores of characters are determined by rolling 2d10 (+ some base, depending on race), and all skills are based on those ability scores.  So in fact only a few of a characters’ skills and abilities (1 in 5) will be divisible by 5.“The downside to this system is that presenting it to the reader is very complex, and tracking all changes to a character over time requires diligent and careful paperwork. A GM cannot quickly glance at a character sheet and determine if all the math has been done to spec - the whole sheet would need to be reverse-engineered to check all decision points.”Actually, keeping track of characters over time is pretty darn simple, as each new career lists the maximum level that a character can have in any particular ability, etc. (i.e. career bonuses are not ‘cumulative’), and a character must achieve all the ‘advances’ in a particular career before advancing to the next one.  It is pretty easy to check – especially since a character’s ‘original abilities’ are also listed on the character sheet (along with his/her previous careers, etc.). “…Characters are humans, elves, dwarfs (sic), and halflings who become more powerful over time as they kill monsters, take their stuff, and power up….”Actually, WFRP adventures are quite different from D&D adventures.  WFRP is not about 'killing monsters, taking their stuff, and powering up'.  To interpret the game in this way is to miss the whole point -- and conveys an incorrect picture of the game to potential players.More precisely, combat is much more rare –- and generally considered something to be avoided –- in WFRP games, as it is more dangerous than in D&D, and healing is slower and more difficult.  There is also far less emphasis on ‘loot’ in WFRP – adventurers are more likely to be fighting for their lives (and sanity) than more thousands of gold pieces and magic items.  Magic items are very rare, and magic is unpredictable and feared.“A system for creating magic items, and more magic items (there are only 2 magic items presented in the core book, and neither of them are very interesting mechanically)”Well, this kinda misses one of the main points of the Warhammer setting, namely, that magic items are extremely rare.  It is plain different from D&D in this respect.Particular quibbles aside, the overall problem with the review is that it tries to fit the square WFRP 2e peg into a round D&D 3e hole.  As a consequence, the review is misleading.</blockquote>

Verification