Poll
Question:
With WFRP;...
Option 1: prefered only needing d10s
votes: 8
Option 2: perfered using many dice
votes: 2
Option 3: prefered lemon curry (feel free to explain)
votes: 1
With WFRP, do you think that Second Edition's move to only using the d10 (and d%) helped or hindered the game?
I liked the fact that it needs only 10 sided dice, or sometimes rarely a d5 roll. But it is only an aesthetical appreciation. In practice I sometimes used some other dice at the table too, should some need outside of the rules require it, like a d12 roll to see in which direction something randomly lands.
Quote from: jadrax;843993With WFRP, do you think that Second Edition's move to only using the d10 (and d%) helped or hindered the game?
I felt that nearly all design decisions for 2nd Ed made the game a lot blander - in the same way that modern cars seem to look the same. It felt like Warhammer "as seen through a D&D3 lens".
That, and moving the art and layout style closer to the miniatures game (while understandable from an IP point of view) killed the game for me.
I don't think that in and of itself made a difference. Regardless, 2e was the most solid version of WFRP rules-wise.
Btw, when I first read the thread title I thought it was about "what if WHFRP did away with the singles digit and resolved everything with a single d10 roll-under roll?"
In 1st Ed the advance schemes used only +10/+1 increments, anyway, and the hit location "flip thing", while nifty, could easily be replaced by something else.