WFRP 4th Edition - How the game has evolved.

[macd21]

The 1st and 2ed career systems were actually more restrictive than 4th’s, as they forced you to leave your current career in order to advance, and much more strongly incentivised you along one career path. There were tiers in those editions too (though most career ms only had 3), they just weren’t highlighted the way the are in 4th.

 

[TheSword]

Well there were lots of classes in 2e that were natural continuations. Mercenary, mercenary captain etc and the seaman, mate, ship captain chain. These aren’t the only equivalents.so it seems harsh trying to level this criticism at 4e alone.

The level 4 Road Captain who can oversee a whole route or stretch doesn’t seem outrageous. Who do you think leads the road wardens?

As for Ratcatcher level 4 - the Exteminator - with a large and vicious dog! They’re not exactly outrageous either. It’s a bit of fun. It just extends a natural progression to its logical conclusion. In a world with skaven a skilled and experienced Rat Catcher seems like a good idea to me.

I can’t speak for your experiences. But my party of 4 that have never played WFRP of any edition before, regularly switched characters. One has gone from Riverwarden to Scryer. The other went from Noble to Fencer to Knight of the White Wolf. The system handles and encourages career change just fine!

Nobody is harming how new players come to the game or world building. There’s a lot of hyperbole there. The game has an extremely flexible approach that actively promotes world building and characterization. Not forcing a person to go Bounty Hunter - Targeteer - Assassin - or something like it. We’re all smart folks though. We can sort it out!

 

[teitan]

This just continues my perception that DCC is "better" at WFRP than WFRP 4e seems to do. At least in the lower levels of DCC. I got 4e when it came out and it was a LOT compared to 2e, which was the version I played. As I've gotten older I have preferred easier access games, not less rules, but easier to understand and therefore rules friendly.

 

[TheSword]

This just continues my perception that DCC is "better" at WFRP than WFRP 4e seems to do. At least in the lower levels of DCC. I got 4e when it came out and it was a LOT compared to 2e, which was the version I played. As I've gotten older I have preferred easier access games, not less rules, but easier to understand and therefore rules friendly.

What is DCC?

 

[Neonchameleon]

What is DCC?

Dungeon Crawl Classics - the name of which alone should be enough to say why DCC is not better at WFRP than WFRP is.

 

[schneeland]

Although I like DCC, I wouldn't necessarily use it for playing in the Old World. I think the light-weight alternative to WFRP would be Warlock! (sadly, I find it a bit too light-weight, especially its magic system).

 

[TheSword]

Dungeon Crawl Classics - the name of which alone should be enough to say why DCC is not better at WFRP than WFRP is.

Yes WFRP is about as far from dungeon crawling as it’s possible to be.

Interestingly I think on of the things WFRP 4e has tried to do is make it possible to not be a combat master and yet genuinely contribute to the adventure/party/campaign.

• The Career system starts it off by describing characters based on what they. Rat catcher, merchant, envoy, nun etc.
• The skill system is extensive and with SL used to identify not just if you pass or fail but how much.
• Non combat skills can be used in combat. The assess action for instance or using skills like animal handling, charm or lore to defend in combat.
• The status system built into the game which affects a range of things from skill tests to income to ettiquette.
• Extensive crafting systems such as the herbology, potions, weapon smithing, Magic items etc. the system even has rules for collecting monster parts for such things… including how long they would stay fresh.
• Sub systems such a sailing and merchant rules that make skills actually mean something.

I respect a person wanting rules light. It’s not my cup of tea but I get why some people do. I just think having a crunchier system - when that system isn’t just about combat - brings with it a lot of opportunities.

At the same time, tables can chose to dwell or not on some or all of these elements and the game still works fine. I know status hasn’t come up a lot in our games so far for instance. However I know in the next part of enemy within it will become a big deal as the start to interact with an elector count’s court.

 

[TheSword]

A side question if I may? I considered doing a breakdown of the adventures released for WFRP 4e, mainly because I think they’re the best quality adventures I’ve seen written for any system. Would there be an interest in this do you think? Obviously it would be spoilerific. Maybe more people trading this thread are players than DMs so it wouldn’t be as useful.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

A side question if I may? I considered doing a breakdown of the adventures released for WFRP 4e, mainly because I think they’re the best quality adventures I’ve seen written for any system. Would there be an interest in this do you think? Obviously it would be spoilerific. Maybe more people trading this thread are players than DMs so it wouldn’t be as useful.

That would be awesome. Instead of having to read through all by ourselves, we get summaries plus a balanced review. What's not to like?

 

[schneeland]

Getting your impression, even if it's a bit spoilery, would be nice (I don't really need insight into the minutiae of the adventures anyway). Especially for the shorter adventures like Rough Night at the Three Feathers and the various Ubersreik adventures.