WotC_Rodney's WFRP3 review

[Treebore]

If this is the future, I guess I better start pouring the grog. This sounds... distasteful.

Hey, I am only about 8 years short being as "old school" as you can be in this hobby, and it plays much, much, better than it looks. I would say over all we had an easier time of starting up the game than we did when we first played Warhammer 2E.

Like Rodney says, this is not a board game, all the stuff is there to facilitate play.

Don't write it off until you get to play it a couple of times. As comparison I gave 4E nearly 100 hours of play time before I wrote it off.

 

[arscott]

Huh?

D&D 3/4 are both extremely complex games, though in different ways. Or to use the words of the wise: "a convoluted, interconnecting mess"

I don't see that WFRP comes even close, regardless of edition.


Otherwise, great, thorough, honest review - thanks for the link!

Sorry, I was being imprecise here. D&D has many complicated corner cases and a great deal of emergent complexity, where WFRP does not. But an understanding of those hidden complexities isn't really required to play a simple sword & board fighter.

But when it comes to the basics, there's not a huge amount of difference: WFRP actions are only slightly less complicated than D&D 4e powers*, tracking character status is theoretically more complicated but made easier by the components, character creation in WFRP is about as fast and easy as Charbuilder-assisted 4e creation, etc.

My point is, a 10 year old kid plays and enjoys D&D, he'll get WFRP. But if that same kid has trouble playing that simple fighter, WFRP will be similarly problematic.

*well, the ones in the PHB--complexity takes off in the splats, but I expect that to be true of WFRP3 also

 

[pawsplay]

Hey, I am only about 8 years short being as "old school" as you can be in this hobby, and it plays much, much, better than it looks. I would say over all we had an easier time of starting up the game than we did when we first played Warhammer 2E.

Like Rodney says, this is not a board game, all the stuff is there to facilitate play.

Don't write it off until you get to play it a couple of times. As comparison I gave 4E nearly 100 hours of play time before I wrote it off.

Let me put it this way: the notion that it has recharging abilities puts me off. I was never fond of "limit breaks" in Final Fantasy, and the early discussion of 4e bringing per-encounter martial exploits to the game was something that sounded unappealing even before the details came trickling in. While the idea of abilities being summarized on a card is appealing, the idea that the rules actually fit on the card is troubling. In general, I view "exception-based design" as a necessary evil.

Now, if you told me that WFRPG kept the percentile system and the 2e upgrades, streamlined the professions table, added details from the Olde World Armoury, and restored the Fmir's place in the setting, then you're saying something to me.

 

[Treebore]

The "recharging" is just another way of saying, "You must wait 2, 3, 4, or more rounds before you can use this ability again.

So when you use the ability you put the tokens on the card of the ability you used and remove one each round until you take them all off, and then you can use that power again.

Its no different than waiting to recover cast spells, except the recharge duration is a matter of rounds rather than a day, or different encounters, etc...

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The "recharging" is just another way of saying, "You must wait 2, 3, 4, or more rounds before you can use this ability again.

So when you use the ability you put the tokens on the card of the ability you used and remove one each round until you take them all off, and then you can use that power again.

Its no different than waiting to recover cast spells, except the recharge duration is a matter of rounds rather than a day, or different encounters, etc...

I suppose what might sit bad for pawsplay is if this also applies to non-magical abilities.

While the idea of abilities being summarized on a card is appealing, the idea that the rules actually fit on the card is troubling

Most 3.x style feats and many spells would fit on one card.

The "trick" is typically that by using a streamlined core system and well-defined keywords, you can express information a lot of information on a card. A "+2 to damage rolls with the selected weapon" fits on one card. It doesn't really explain how damage rolls work (and when you got to roll damage in the first place), because that is a core rule that you just have to know (or look up elsewhere.)

 

[Treebore]

Yeah, but at least the ones I saw used needed it, like the one where you could get off 2, 3, 4, 5 arrow shots in one action! Dang! A 3 round cool down/recharge is needed! At least you have plenty of other things you can do on these other rounds, including other cool attacks.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Yeah, but at least the ones I saw used needed it, like the one where you could get off 2, 3, 4, 5 arrow shots in one action! Dang! A 3 round cool down/recharge is needed! At least you have plenty of other things you can do on these other rounds, including other cool attacks.

You and me think game balance, others might thing "realistically" or "verisimilitudous". If you can fire 5 arrows in one action once, why does it require you to wait 3 rounds before you can do it again?

Meh. I am not fighting their battle. I think recharge mechanics are a fine way to introduce variety and "gamist" tactics in a game.

 

[arscott]

Let me put it this way: the notion that it has recharging abilities puts me off. I was never fond of "limit breaks" in Final Fantasy, and the early discussion of 4e bringing per-encounter martial exploits to the game was something that sounded unappealing even before the details came trickling in. While the idea of abilities being summarized on a card is appealing, the idea that the rules actually fit on the card is troubling. In general, I view "exception-based design" as a necessary evil.

The nice thing about WFRP3e is that you can build a perfectly valid character with no recharging actions (well, it'd be awkward to build a character without any of the active defenses, but I doubt you'll much mind the recharge on those).

Once you've got your race and your career, you have a number of creation points that you can spend on different things:

•Characteristics (equivalent to D&D ability scores)
•Actions (similar to D&D 4e powers. Some have recharge ratings but others can be used constantly)
•Talents (similar to D&D 4e feats, some exhaust and must be recharged, but others offer passive benefits)
•Skills & Specializations
•Wealth & Equipment

So if you prefer the old-school fighter that just swings with his sword every round instead of using these new-fangled maneuvers, then sink your points into Characteristics, Skills, and/or Wealth, and just use your basic melee strike action every round (and your catch-all "perform a stunt" action when you want to do something cool and different).

Also, on an unrelated note, I have to share the following condition card from the adventurer's kit:

Intoxicated
Lingering Effect
Add 2 misfortune dice and
1 fortune die to all checks.

Being drunk usually makes you worse, but sometimes it makes you better. how cool is that?

 

[pawsplay]

The "recharging" is just another way of saying, "You must wait 2, 3, 4, or more rounds before you can use this ability again.

So when you use the ability you put the tokens on the card of the ability you used and remove one each round until you take them all off, and then you can use that power again.

Its no different than waiting to recover cast spells, except the recharge duration is a matter of rounds rather than a day, or different encounters, etc...

Apart from the fact that martial abilities are not spells, I don't like spells to recover that often, either.

 

[pawsplay]

Most 3.x style feats and many spells would fit on one card.

The "trick" is typically that by using a streamlined core system and well-defined keywords, you can express information a lot of information on a card. A "+2 to damage rolls with the selected weapon" fits on one card. It doesn't really explain how damage rolls work (and when you got to roll damage in the first place), because that is a core rule that you just have to know (or look up elsewhere.)

Right, right. But this is where "exception-based" design becomes a problem for me, like ridiculous situations in 4e where slow doesn't slow down spiders because they don't "move." You can put a 3.5 feat or spell on a card, but that's because the rulebook has a robust set of rules and vocabularly. I'm sure WFRPG 3e has its strengths in that regard, but my admittedly vague impression so far is that it is more like 4e in that respect, in that special abilities are rarely defined beyond their boardgame characteristics.