macd21 said:

Please tell me that just speculation on how the story dice may work.

macd21 said:

I think mac's saying that those effects -- the words I've highlighted in the quote -- those are the kinds of story-based effects that the dice should give you. It's nothing more than flavor (well, difficult terrain might have a mechanical effect, but let's skip it for now).

I'm not sure they're entirely story-based, but at least two people from the GenCon seminar mentioned this aspect of the dice.

I think this narrarative dice issue is going to cause problems for some.  new players will probably love it, as it 'spices up' otherwise mundane dice rolling.  but creative roleplayers will start to see the same results over and over and wish for something more.  sure, as a GM when I adjudicate a complication it seems arbitrary and unfair to some.  when the dice adjudicate a complication the player can't feel picked on or whine about fairness, cuz the dice said so.  what starts to happen is that everything boils down to a few key decisions which correspond to meta-game choices leaving little room for creativity or DM fudging.  from what I gather, you chose a combat manuever and a stance to go with it with each combing to dictate which dice from each type are rolled to produce some effect.  Lets use the example given above of the dwarf trollslayer and the orc.  lets assume the dangerous terrain is a shallow swamp and the player says he wants to wade into the swamp and taunt the orc into joining him in the mire and would like to prepare a savage blow for him when he takes the challenge.  how would 3e handle that?  I suspect there is no action card for taunt, nor any for readying an action to be used later.  im betting its all self contained within your turn and you can do about 7 different things either cautiously or recklessly.  Im gonna guess Charge,Melee Attack, Ranged Attack, Manuever, Cast Spell, Use Item and Dodge. 

vyrago said:

It's hard to say yet without seeing more of the cards, but I seriously doubt they are as limited as you imagine. The above example would be resolved much as it would in 2ed. In 2ed, I might have the Dwarf make a Fel roll if I thought the Orc was reluctant to engage him in melee for some reason, otherwise I'd just have the Orc charge. With 3ed it would be pretty much the same thing. The Dwarf would roll his Fel, possibly with some negative and/or positive dice based on the circumstances.

VYRAGO: I think this narrarative dice issue is going to cause problems for some. new players will probably love it, as it 'spices up' otherwise mundane dice rolling. but creative roleplayers will start to see the same results over and over and wish for something more.

Bear in mind that I only know what I've picked up from the internets. This is what I've put together so far, for what it's worth.

Think of any action you might roll for, whether it's a combat action, lockpicking or a drinking contest. Each situation should be unique, because you're roleplaying. Each lock is different -- the lighting, the amount of time you have, the picks in your kit might not be good for this one. Whatever. You've roleplayed your way to this point, now it's time to roll. The dice add some story element. Hourglass=Time was a factor. Comet=Faith was a factor. Sun=Smarts were a factor.

Succeed or fail, you would have some story element to work with. It's totally random, so you should ignore it if it doesn't help. But if it does help the story, then that drives the next action, maybe in a significant way.

It's going to be different every time, because each situation will be different. No two locks are the same. Now, no two swings of the axe have to be the same. That's pretty cool, I think. It only becomes repetitive if the GM keeps putting the characters into the same situations all the time, right? The game can't make you a good GM, but it sure looks like it's trying to give you every advantage.

VYRAGO: lets assume the dangerous terrain is a shallow swamp and the player says he wants to wade into the swamp and taunt the orc into joining him in the mire and would like to prepare a savage blow for him when he takes the challenge. how would 3e handle that? I suspect there is no action card for taunt...

I don't know how much you can get done on your turn, or how many actions you can take or anything, but I think this is how it's going to go down:

Taunt should be covered by the skill Intimidate. (Or maybe it's its own action. If not, I've created the first house rule for V3. Use Intimidate.) That skill is actually listed for the Troll Slayer.

So you'd make a skill test. Opposed test: your Intimidate vs. the Willpower. I don't know how opposed tests will be handled but I'm sure the game will have them. If the Orc wins the opposed test, your taunt fails. (Oh, and you rolled a Comet.) Something about faith, faith... You threw a religious symbol at the Orc and told him to come taste Ulric's wrath. But he laughed at you and threw back a rude gesture, then told you to come get some Waaaaah! if you really think you're so tough, manling.

Now let's say your taunt is successful and you rolled a Sun along with it. Smarts. Well, that's easy. You quite calmly point out to him that he's the smallest Goblin you've ever seen, and he loses his mind with rage. Here he comes!

VYRAGO: I suspect there is no action... for readying an action to be used later.

Seriously, after the awesome you just read, do you care? Okay, V2 has a Delayed Action. If there's any place for them in the V3 combat system, I'm sure they'll be there.

VYRAGO: im betting its all self contained within your turn and you can do about 7 different things either cautiously or recklessly. Im gonna guess Charge,Melee Attack, Ranged Attack, Manuever, Cast Spell, Use Item and Dodge.

There are also around 20 basic skills listed on the character sheet, so I'd expect to be able to do a lot more, as well. And there are ways to contribute some of your character's abilities to benefit the entire group using the adventuring-party cards, which are going to affect your character (and others) in ways that we haven't really seen yet.

I posted this in the rpg.net thread but since the subject of dice is being discussed a lot here I'll take the liberty of posting it here as well. Again it's from Erifnogard at rpg.net:

"I don't remember mentioning before that one of the neat effects of the dice is that because you get different color dice from different sources (blue for native ability, green for conservative stance, white for fortunate circumstance/tactics, etc) you can read your dice results with a bit of flavor text built in. For example, my priest chooses to conservatively heal the trollslayer and is in a nice clean inn with plenty of rest and food for both parties I would have my ability dice, a couple of which are swapped for conservative dice, and several fortune dice representing the favorable circumstances.

If I succeed, which dice I succeed on tells me a different story. If I succeed primarily on my conservative dice my cleric can snidely point out how lucky the party is that I insisted on getting the smelly dwarf to the inn so I could properly treat his wounds in a proper setting. If I primarily succeed on fortune, I can loudly sing the praises of the gods for favoring my endeavors so. Could I do these things anyway? Sure. The dice just give me a quick story to work with if I want it."

Basically it tells you what modifier or ability actually make you succeed or fail. Of course, you're completely free to ignore this extra spice, or just make up your own reasons. But I actually think that for a lot of people it'll be a cool little mechanic. The group I'm playing with usually don't have any trouble coming up with colourful descriptions for their actions, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't welcome some extra material to work with.

Or, if it's really not your cup of tea, you could ignore it completely; which is how V2 works at the moment. You just lump together all the modifiers and get a single result instead of seeing how the different modifiers actually interact and create a situation.

In any case I fail to see how people would feel limited by this system.

i think the limit is seen in the fact that the more things are codified, the less freedom you have to choose what happens. If the rules offer 5 pieces of official flavour text, then people stick with that. It's sort of funny but the more you help people the less they end up doing off their own bat.

Deal breakers for me are mechanical. Are PCs identical at chargen? Are all sword masters 3 dice WS and 2 dice Dodge? Do NPCs use the same actions as PCs? Ie the oft touted 'ranged shot' ability. Is that a PC only ability or is it just 'an ability' that anyone with a ranged weapon can use?

If the answer to first is yes OR the second no, then I won't be getting it. Individual characters and nonmook NPCs are the reason I got into WFRP in the first place. Without one or both I won't find anything interesting.

Hellebore

It wierd how all of the above explanations of how the system will work are just as much a work of theory and wishfulness as all the "doomsaying" "grognard" arguments on why the system wont work.

And even with the nice and elegant ways some of you have explained how you perceive the system working, my opinion is still the same. Its a system either designed to be expensive with cards, special dice and new updates to enhane your character packs or a system that got so complicated and confusing to play that the cards were added to be play aids as it was easier to design and add them then it was to go back to formula on the game.

Truth is, if what half what half you guys is saying (which, for the record is, "there isnt anything you couldnt do in 2E") is true, then you just proved that a new edition wasnt needed as its all Player/GM preference and you can add, omit or write any rule you want.

Im thankful for all the opinions, thoughts and arguments, but specialized dice, special cards and a fancy box are not enough for me to be tricked into buying a game, that mechanically at heart makes me sick.

Hellebore said:

Why would anyone design a big-name, big-budget, must-succeed game that would be full of such obviously poor design choices? I mean, those would be horrible choices. Awful.

Truth is, if what half what half you guys is saying (which, for the record is, "there isnt anything you couldnt do in 2E") is true, then you just proved that a new edition wasnt needed as its all Player/GM preference and you can add, omit or write any rule you want.

The same could be said of 2e - why bother making a second edition?

Saying that you can perform the same kinds of actions in 3 as you could 2 doesn't mean there haven't been changes. There quite obviously have. The question is whether those changes are improvements or not. Someone can climb a wall in 2e and 3e, but you roll different dice, have different options and have different outcomes. Which results in a better play experience? We won't know for sure until the game is released and the fanbase has a chance to try it out.

I don’t understand why people are so up in arms I play/played first edition WHFRP and yeah it’s a good game and a nice world, but it’s far from perfect. I think it’s good for a designer to want to update things and stamp their own mark on the product.

Yes the cost is fairly high when compare to other rpgs, but it seems to contain a fairly expansive list of items and when you compare it to some of the larger board games or games that require multiple books to run the divide is not so big.
 

People winged and moaned about 4e, but 1000’s of people still bought and are playing it at this very moment and so it will be with WFRP 3e.
 

DagobahDave said:

I'm not really confidant it won't end up like that. As i've said before, using dice as skill pips means changing by just one die is a massive difference. So for balance sake each career would have to produce a character with the same die values for each characteristic. There's no way Str1 can balance against PCs with Str4 due to the reliance on specialist dice with a small chance of rolling successes.

I find most D&D characters start the game virtually identical within their class because the players always min max the stats (and 4th simply encourages this). Miraculously all wizards have pretty much the same stats.

D&D also gives all the special attack and ability cards to the PCs. NPCs have a very tiny range of things to do. My lvl 8 Shaman has something like 10 or more ability cards unique to him.

Or are you just trying to get me to make fun of D&D4th ed?

Hellebore

Hellebore said:

Well, I see what you mean, but the coin has two sides. I tried playing Dark Heresy with a group of players who didn't have much experience with roleplaying. They did pretty well overall but they often struggled with coming up  with imaginery descriptions for their actions and I think a system like this would have given them that little extra help needed. As for old rpg veterans like us I think it would be easy enough to just ignore the specifics of the dots and just see how many you get. For me personally, it seems like a good mechanic to add some extra flavour.

The biggest reason that I'm positively inclined towards V3 is actually FFGs track record. I've been playing their games for many years before they acquired the GW license and I think they turn out top-notch products. What I've seen so far of V3 certainly looks interesting, but it's mainly my faith in FFG that keeps me from (hopefully) unnecessary worrying.

I completly agree with Vyrago.

The 3ed seems to try to reach the kiddies that play WAR and dont have a clue what real roleplay is. In a roleplay the players and the Gm tell the story together, not the dice. And actualy i dont see something realy narrativ in "you deal +2 damage" or "you gain an extra manoevre".

What i see is, that WHFRPG is getting into a new direction because now its more economic.

Yes i admit, a lot of the ideas in the new edition might be realy good and fun, but this ist not why FFG changed it. Everytime economy gets involved into something, the spirit gets lost and the price goes up.

And there is mor to criticise. The point with the cards... soon you ll have so many cards, you ll just lose the oversight.

The tokens... why tokens??? to justify a higer price (look at the quality of the tokens, the production cost is 1 cent per token, but they sell them for 30 cent)

it maybe a new game, and it may be fun and modern, but its a spiritless something that wants to pull out the money of your pockets (yes i know, every company wants that, but i dont want it in that way).

vyrago said:

How do you suggest anyone do that when the game isn't even out yet?