Quote from: Drew;279572No one is saying that.

It certainly seemed so, what with people saying stuff like "Is there a way PC's can trick, scare, outsmart or otherwise cause orcs to flee? Maybe that could substitute, at times, for out and out violence?" or "What's to stop them from sneaking off with all the cash?"

The implication seems to be that in WFRP the characters are so much more vulnerable that you can't just have a standard dungeon, you have to have something where it allows the PCs to do all kinds of "sneak" tactics because everyone knows that in WFRP its WRONG WRONG WRONG to ever actually fight someone, because if you do then its not like some Swine claims to remember The Enemy Within was like!

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;279612It certainly seemed so, what with people saying stuff like "Is there a way PC's can trick, scare, outsmart or otherwise cause orcs to flee? Maybe that could substitute, at times, for out and out violence?" or "What's to stop them from sneaking off with all the cash?"

The implication seems to be that in WFRP the characters are so much more vulnerable that you can't just have a standard dungeon, you have to have something where it allows the PCs to do all kinds of "sneak" tactics because everyone knows that in WFRP its WRONG WRONG WRONG to ever actually fight someone, because if you do then its not like some Swine claims to remember The Enemy Within was like!

If you play WFRP consistently in the style of D&D then your characters will die, no question. In order to get to levels where the game can be played like D&D you'll need to adopt a far more cautious approach. There is nothing "swinish" about this, it's a simple recognition of the lethality of the system in relation to character development.  

That WFRP can accomodate epic-- or perhaps more accurately sub-epic -- characters is indisputable. Traditional dungeon bashes are quite possible within it's framework. But pretending that it plays just like D&D is disingenuous. It's dirtier, tricksier and more deadly by far. It explicity rewards people for fighting like honourless dogs, and I love it for that.

Quote from: Drew;279620If you play WFRP consistently in the style of D&D then your characters will die, no question. In order to get to levels where the game can be played like D&D you'll need to adopt a far more cautious approach. There is nothing "swinish" about this, it's a simple recognition of the lethality of the system in relation to character development.  

I'm still not convinced this is the case, I guess it depends on the definition of 'played like D&D' means.  D&D characters at level 1 are usually far more fragile then WFRP characters starting out are.  If you take an average character with 10 hit points a successful hit always does damage to them where as in WFRP successful hit's often don't do damage and WFRP characters even have means (dodge/parry) to avoid getting hit.   Though a typical 1st level character is less likely to get hit overall because of AC.  But a crit from an ORC in D20 can be as lethal as Ulric's Fury in WFRP.  Also adding in that WFRP characters have fate points as well.  

Where the difference really diverges between the two systems is that most D&D games take it easy on starting characters and by the time they get a couple levels under their belt their chance of a quick death greatly diminishes where as with WFRP it never does.

But this still goes back to what 'played like D&D' means.  Just looking at our group we play our characters smart in any system we don't run head first into anything, we look for advantages and opportunities etc....  This typically though has a bigger benefit in WFRP over D&D because of what each systems assign bonuses to.  So the reward and encouragement to play smart in WFRP is greater then D&D, which often rewards ball forward methods instead.

QuoteThat WFRP can accomodate epic-- or perhaps more accurately sub-epic -- characters is indisputable. Traditional dungeon bashes are quite possible within it's framework. But pretending that it plays just like D&D is disingenuous. It's dirtier, tricksier and more deadly by far. It explicity rewards people for fighting like honourless dogs, and I love it for that.

I agree with this but would add WFRP imo is by far a better system for Epic play the characters are epic by skills and talent and the paths they tread.  They aren't just combat monsters who soak damage like sponges and have 100,000gp in magic items.   D&D characters go beyond epic and are pretty much fantasy superheroes by the time they hit higher levels.  But I guess it comes down to what you view as Epic.  I think of Epic fantasy in terms of Gemmell's books, Conan, Beowulf etc... The characters weren't so much godlike in terms of what they could do, they were just legendary in what they did and that kind of frame works far better in the WFRP power scale then it does in stock D&D.

Quote from: kryyst;279637I'm still not convinced this is the case, I guess it depends on the definition of 'played like D&D' means.  D&D characters at level 1 are usually far more fragile then WFRP characters starting out are.  If you take an average character with 10 hit points a successful hit always does damage to them where as in WFRP successful hit's often don't do damage and WFRP characters even have means (dodge/parry) to avoid getting hit.   Though a typical 1st level character is less likely to get hit overall because of AC.  But a crit from an ORC in D20 can be as lethal as Ulric's Fury in WFRP.  Also adding in that WFRP characters have fate points as well.  

Where the difference really diverges between the two systems is that most D&D games take it easy on starting characters and by the time they get a couple levels under their belt their chance of a quick death greatly diminishes where as with WFRP it never does.

Whilst I agree with your specifics, I'll clarify that my comparison is based on the spectrum of D&D play -- from 1st to 10th to 30th+ level, depending on your edition. Like you say, the immediate risk of mortality rapidly diminishes, to the extent that any comparison that relies on 1st level as the bench mark for how the game generally plays is a huge distortion. WFRP is deadlier overall for far longer periods of play time, which is why I say that playing it consistently like D&D will result in a massacre.

QuoteI agree with this but would add WFRP imo is by far a better system for Epic play the characters are epic by skills and talent and the paths they tread.  They aren't just combat monsters who soak damage like sponges and have 100,000gp in magic items.   D&D characters go beyond epic and are pretty much fantasy superheroes by the time they hit higher levels.  But I guess it comes down to what you view as Epic.  I think of Epic fantasy in terms of Gemmell's books, Conan, Beowulf etc... The characters weren't so much godlike in terms of what they could do, they were just legendary in what they did and that kind of frame works far better in the WFRP power scale then it does in stock D&D.

That's very much an issue of taste. Personally speaking I enjoy playing epic of all stripes.  

Quote from: RPGPundit;279612It certainly seemed so, what with people saying stuff like "Is there a way PC's can trick, scare, outsmart or otherwise cause orcs to flee? Maybe that could substitute, at times, for out and out violence?" or "What's to stop them from sneaking off with all the cash?"

The implication seems to be that in WFRP the characters are so much more vulnerable that you can't just have a standard dungeon, you have to have something where it allows the PCs to do all kinds of "sneak" tactics because everyone knows that in WFRP its WRONG WRONG WRONG to ever actually fight someone, because if you do then its not like some Swine claims to remember The Enemy Within was like!

RPGPundit

I don't know where you're coming from on this - Which isn't all that uncommon - But I made that comment about sneaking off with the loot because it's Something that a fair number of PC's will do!

So please, Pundit, turn off the paranoia for once in your life.

Castle Drachenfels FTW!

Quote from: RPGPundit;279550I don't see why a WFRP dungeon has to have less fighting than a D&D dungeon.

Most people who choose WFRP over D&D do so because they love fantasy, but they're bored of just running through a series of fights every session. So while technically there's nothing to prevent monster-packed hackfest dungeons in WFRP, it runs counter to the spirit of the game and doesn't play to the game's strengths.

Quote from: Drew;279646Whilst I agree with your specifics, I'll clarify that my comparison is based on the spectrum of D&D play -- from 1st to 10th to 30th+ level, depending on your edition. Like you say, the immediate risk of mortality rapidly diminishes, to the extent that any comparison that relies on 1st level as the bench mark for how the game generally plays is a huge distortion. WFRP is deadlier overall for far longer periods of play time, which is why I say that playing it consistently like D&D will result in a massacre.

That's very much an issue of taste. Personally speaking I enjoy playing epic of all stripes.  

I concur on that scale.

Quote from: RPGPundit;279612It certainly seemed so, what with people saying stuff like "Is there a way PC's can trick, scare, outsmart or otherwise cause orcs to flee? Maybe that could substitute, at times, for out and out violence?" or "What's to stop them from sneaking off with all the cash?"

In low-level D&D games, at least in older editions, this is actually considered smart play.  You avoid combat whenever possible, not only because rolling dice is liable to get you killed, but because the real XP wasn't gained by killing monsters, it was by taking their stuff.

Seriously, I've never participated in a dungeon game that was just endless combat, even when I was young and stupid (as opposed to just stupid like I am now)...I can't for the life of me understand where that stereotype came from.

Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;279659Most people who choose WFRP over D&D do so because they love fantasy, but they're bored of just running through a series of fights every session. So while technically there's nothing to prevent monster-packed hackfest dungeons in WFRP, it runs counter to the spirit of the game and doesn't play to the game's strengths.

I disagree about that being why people play WFRP. Its certainly not why I play and love it.  WFRP is just a more "european" feeling RPG, with a grittier feel to it, but it is no way against the spirit of WFRP for the group to be a gang of ultraviolent toughs.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;279612The implication seems to be that in WFRP the characters are so much more vulnerable that you can't just have a standard dungeon, you have to have something where it allows the PCs to do all kinds of "sneak" tactics because everyone knows that in WFRP its WRONG WRONG WRONG to ever actually fight someone, because if you do then its not like some Swine claims to remember The Enemy Within was like!

Or how about this, some people find other things to be fun as well? I mean some groups are heavy into traps and puzzle solving, others like more social interaction. What's wrong with that?

Quote from: RPGPundit;279685I disagree about that being why people play WFRP. Its certainly not why I play and love it.  WFRP is just a more "european" feeling RPG, with a grittier feel to it, but it is no way against the spirit of WFRP for the group to be a gang of ultraviolent toughs.

1. The XP system is based on plot objectives and roleplay rather than kills or loot.
2. In a randomly generated party, you're quite likely to have at least one character with no combat skills whatsoever, unlike in D&D.
3. As others have mentioned, the lethality of the combat system forces players to be more cautious than in D&D, especially at mid-to-high levels.
4. The published adventures for WFRP include fewer combat encounters, on average, than D&D adventures, and combat is rarely mandatory.
5. Published WFRP adventures don't provide "balanced" encounters. In fact, some encounters are meant to be run away from.

I did run a game last year where the PCs were ultra-violent thugs, but they only got away with it because the game was set in Mousillon, where there's no law enforcement and where the average NPC is a malnourished weakling. If you're running the setting "as-written", your gang of ultra-violent thugs will be swinging from the gallows before too long.

Perhaps you, personally, enjoy a more combat-heavy WFRP game, but I suspect you're not representative of the fanbase. Why don't you register on the FFG official WFRP forum and make a poll?

Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;2796891. The XP system is based on plot objectives and roleplay rather than kills or loot.

Um, sort of. Most of the XP awards are based on "plot objectives" that involve fighting things and killing menaces.
Its one degree of separation from "you killed the orc so you get 10xp", but in essence there's little difference in the exection.

Quote2. In a randomly generated party, you're quite likely to have at least one character with no combat skills whatsoever, unlike in D&D.

I think this is relative too. A 1st level wizard doesn't have very much "combat skill" in D&D; and a starting-level ratcatcher in WFRP can still fight; yes, he won't fight as well as a starting-level soldier-career, but he'll probably still be about as useful on that front as a 1st level D&D thief, and a starting-level apprentice wizard in WFRP will probably be MORE useful than a 1st level D&D wizard.

Quote3. As others have mentioned, the lethality of the combat system forces players to be more cautious than in D&D, especially at mid-to-high levels.

The main difference is that while both D&D characters and WFRP characters can become absolute combat monsters at high-level play, it is easier for a high-level WFRP character to end up being felled from a very lucky roll by an opponent, whereas a high-level D&D character will only be felled by prolonged ongoing wearing-down of his hit points.
This difference essentially makes the game grittier, which I like; it means that combat in WFRP always feels like low- to mid-level D&D in the sense of personal menace to a PC, without meaning that WFRP characters can't also reach a level where they're horrifyingly devastating in combat.
What it doesn't mean is "WFRP characters will DIE in combat all the time so you can't do combat in WFRP".

Quote4. The published adventures for WFRP include fewer combat encounters, on average, than D&D adventures, and combat is rarely mandatory.

Really? Because in the WFRP 2e adventure books that I've seen (and I've seen and RUN a lot of them) combat is pretty much something that happens in nearly every session, and usually the conclusions of these adventures have combat scenes that utterly blow away D&D adventures in terms of how impressively they've been crafted (I'm thinking of the conclusions of the Paths of the Damned adventures here in particular).
And the only way combat isn't "mandatory" in these adventures would be if by "not mandatory" you meant "the PCs decide it would be more artistic if their characters simply died" or "the PCs run away and let the horrifying evils conquer the Empire"; neither of which I find very desirable or realistic, though some of the Enemy-within Swine seem to think that this should be the prescribed way of playing the game.

Quote5. Published WFRP adventures don't provide "balanced" encounters. In fact, some encounters are meant to be run away from.

This is true, and another thing I LOVE about WFRP.  In old school D&D, this was a common feature too.
You also don't necessarily have to "Run away" as a solution either; you can try some kind of clever trick, which is often a feature of the WFRP adventures, that usually also require fighting the opponents at the same time as you try to implement said trick.

QuotePerhaps you, personally, enjoy a more combat-heavy WFRP game, but I suspect you're not representative of the fanbase. Why don't you register on the FFG official WFRP forum and make a poll?

I think that the online presence, consisting heavily of guys who read but never ran, or ran but now misremember The Enemy Within, along with D&D-haters that want WFRP to be an artistic game about playing in a filthy world full of skin diseases where you never fight anything, is what is not representative of the real fanbase of WFRP.

Don't get me wrong, the careers system and other details of WFRP mean that things like investigation and social interactions as well as getting deeply involved in the emulation of the particular pseudo-renaissance-europe setting are wonderful features that provide a lot of interesting stuff to do in WFRP aside from and as well as engaging in combat. I think that these are important parts of the WFRP game.  But I think that when you get to the basics of the WFRP game, its about playing a group of people living on the edge of a society on the edge that are in it for the money, but eventually have to get up to being the guys who Kick Chaos' Ass. Ergo, combat!
Its heavy, hardcore, grim and gritty, ultraviolent Sword & Sorcery play. And suggesting that people who play the game or the GMs who run it should try to discourage combat is essentially a pretention of a bunch of asses who utterly fail to get the essence of what is cool about the game.  The covers of both the 1e and 2e main books make a pretty good first impression of what the game is SUPPOSED to be like, and if you haven't looked lately, they do not feature a bunch of struggling piemakers dying of cholera while writing bad poetry, bub.

RPGPundit

Lethality of combat is not a problem in my book.

The idea that a group of characters, when matched with a group of similarly-strong opponents, should usually escape without any casualties is a bit slanted, I think.

I think the idea came from that the objective of D&D, at least from 2e up, was to kill monsters, because this was the only quantifiable means of advancement.  Monsters were the only source of experience, and thus combat became the focus of the game, thus combat had to be less deadly because you're going to be doing it so much.

I perused the WFRP 2nd edition book... a dungeon campaign would most certainly work with these rules.  Usually the goal of entering a dungeon is NOT to exterminate all life therein, but some other reason.  Put the focus (the rewards) on this reason, and players will be inclined not to take needless risk.  Combat should have its rewards, but also drawbacks.  Seriously, who spends their time crawling into holes fighting for recreation?

Quote from: RPGPundit;279774Um, sort of. Most of the XP awards are based on "plot objectives" that involve fighting things and killing menaces.
Its one degree of separation from "you killed the orc so you get 10xp", but in essence there's little difference in the exection.

Not true. Have you even looked at the XP awards in any WFRP adventures besides PotD? I'd have to re-read the PotD books, but I'm pretty sure there are plenty of non-combat related XP awards in there.

Quote from: RPGPundit;279774I think this is relative too. A 1st level wizard doesn't have very much "combat skill" in D&D; and a starting-level ratcatcher in WFRP can still fight; yes, he won't fight as well as a starting-level soldier-career, but he'll probably still be about as useful on that front as a 1st level D&D thief, and a starting-level apprentice wizard in WFRP will probably be MORE useful than a 1st level D&D wizard.

Ratcatchers actually have basic (ranged) combat skills, unlike say, Scribes, Peasants, Valets etc. Yes, we all know that 1st level D&D wizards suck. My point is that every D&D class has some kind of combat-related ability, because combat is how you gain XP in D&D.

Quote from: RPGPundit;279774Really? Because in the WFRP 2e adventure books that I've seen (and I've seen and RUN a lot of them) combat is pretty much something that happens in nearly every session, and usually the conclusions of these adventures have combat scenes that utterly blow away D&D adventures in terms of how impressively they've been crafted (I'm thinking of the conclusions of the Paths of the Damned adventures here in particular).
And the only way combat isn't "mandatory" in these adventures would be if by "not mandatory" you meant "the PCs decide it would be more artistic if their characters simply died" or "the PCs run away and let the horrifying evils conquer the Empire"; neither of which I find very desirable or realistic, though some of the Enemy-within Swine seem to think that this should be the prescribed way of playing the game.

That's the main difference, yes. In WFRP, combat encounters are often given a great deal of care to evoke atmosphere and set up interesting tactical situations, rather than being presented as steps in the level treadmill. It seems like D&D4e is taking this approach too, but I haven't played it yet so I couldn't say for sure.

Quote from: RPGPundit;279774You also don't necessarily have to "Run away" as a solution either; you can try some kind of clever trick, which is often a feature of the WFRP adventures, that usually also require fighting the opponents at the same time as you try to implement said trick.

Or fast-talk your way past Important People who can open up alternate solutions to the problem.

Quote from: RPGPundit;279774I think that the online presence, consisting heavily of guys who read but never ran, or ran but now misremember The Enemy Within, along with D&D-haters that want WFRP to be an artistic game about playing in a filthy world full of skin diseases where you never fight anything, is what is not representative of the real fanbase of WFRP.

You're misrepresenting. You came into this thread asking why combat couldn't be run in WFRP with the same frequency as D&D, and I'm telling you that writers who've attempted making WFRP more like D&D have been booed off the stage.

Quote from: RPGPundit;279774And suggesting that people who play the game or the GMs who run it should try to discourage combat is essentially a pretention of a bunch of asses who utterly fail to get the essence of what is cool about the game.  The covers of both the 1e and 2e main books make a pretty good first impression of what the game is SUPPOSED to be like, and if you haven't looked lately, they do not feature a bunch of struggling piemakers dying of cholera while writing bad poetry, bub.

Again, you're exaggerating. Every WFRP fan likes combat, just not a series of boring combats strung together, one after another, without a good dose of investigation, social interaction and roleplay in-between. And that goes for WFRP dungeons, too. The best WFRP dungeons are either short and brutal, or else they're designed to have lots of social interaction and other non-combat challenges in addition to combat (DotR). Listen, I've played through the long meat-grinder dungeons in WFRP (LotLL, EiF), and they're boring. Simply put, WFRP combat isn't all that interesting mechanically compared to D&D, and there's no tangible reward for slogging through all those dice-rolls (i.e. XP).