Quote from: CRKrueger;394081Very true, your point is taken.  It is a different form of tactics, one that is team-based.  The initiative system is very interesting.  There may also be some tactical depth buried in the cards that I haven't discovered yet.

The one thing that drives me to drink is the lack of actual spatially derived ranges rather then narratively defined ones.  The ranges work if the party is on one side and the bad guys another or the party is in the middle and the bad guys all around.  But once you get party members mixing it up (like people moving away from the center to engage missile-users, then you don't just need a definition of how far each outlier is from the center, but also how far each is from each other.  At that point I begin using a pin vise right above my left eye to relieve the migraine.

How do you deal with ranges in a spread out, messy combat?

Yeah that can get a little more annoying if you let it.  The first general rule is to not worry about it until it matters.  But if you try and envision the battlefield like a wheel, you have a central hub, the outer rim and your spokes in between that set the overall range for the engagement.  

For example Figure out the range from the hub to the rim and perhaps other fixed points of reference if you need.  So we'll say that range is long range all the way around.  Shooting across the battle field is probably not possible in this case as it'd be [outer] center [outer] which is probably more then extreme.

With that in mind we only worry about relevant ranges between combatants when needed.   Combats that aren't in the center or the outer will typically be at medium range to either side or long range to combatants in the middle area on the opposite side of the middle (much easier to draw then say).  For then to you may need to space out the distance between combatants along the outer rim, which again is probably medium or close to each other.  But would depend on how many groups are in the encounter.

But if you have 4 players your opponents are probably going to be 2-3 groups of henchmen (4 in each group) and 1-2 elites (for lack of a better term).   That's a fairly good guideline despite all the possible variables for party makeup etc...

Now if you want a tougher fight after your players have fought through that encounter give them a rally phase and send in another wave.  Better yet setup a tracker with maybe 10 turns on it.  If the players defeat the monsters before turn 10 then no reinforcements come.  If the monsters are still around by turn 10 then they've managed to bring in reinforcements.    Or setup another event at turn 5 and at that event the players will see one monster break off of the pack.  If they stop that monster before he reaches turn 10 they stop the reinforcements, if not...  Either way it's another way of creating some variability into the fight on the part of the GM.   You could hide the track or show it both have their advantages.  

From my GM perspective I like the increased variability the mechanics have to offer and try to embrace it when I can.  The dice results present new situations that I can expand upon beyond a binary pass fail and I like to use trackers when fitting to create situations that I don't know if an outcome will happen or not.  In some ways it allows me to get in on the surprise along with the players.  It's fun not always knowing all the answers ahead of time.

Quote from: kryyst;394076As far as the bits are concerned the action cards are needed.   But all the other tracker stuff is easily transferable to a simple piece of paper.  Like This one.

Those are awesome! thanks for linking.

In return, in case you haven't seen it, this is the greatest thing EVER: http://www.headlesshollow.com/downloads/games/WFRP3_v1.pdf  Kinda blows the FFG GM Screen outta the water.

Quote from: kregmosier;394144Those are awesome! thanks for linking.

In return, in case you haven't seen it, this is the greatest thing EVER: http://www.headlesshollow.com/downloads/games/WFRP3_v1.pdf  Kinda blows the FFG GM Screen outta the water.

Yep I'm aware of it and the previous versions, are even better because they contained inventory lists, and a sheet containing a copy of the basic action cards on it.  Unfortunately and I can't blame them, FFG made him remove some of the directly copied content.  The older versions are all you really need for a player.

Quote from: kryyst;394190Yep I'm aware of it and the previous versions, are even better because they contained inventory lists, and a sheet containing a copy of the basic action cards on it.  Unfortunately and I can't blame them, FFG made him remove some of the directly copied content.  The older versions are all you really need for a player.

Nice...sounds great though.  sad when the fan-made stuff (that's oftentimes better than the official!) gets yanked, but i also understand where FFG is coming from.  these are still all kinds of awesome, and i think really helped me feel less confused about the mechanics at times.  FFG should release such great supporting material...jerks.

I know it'll feel better in Actual Play, or am hoping so.

Quote from: Koltar;393979In my area it went over like a lead balloon.

All the gung-ho Warhammer Fantasy players that have played for years mostly hated it or were mildly ticked off at the packaging style of it.

- Ed C.

Interestingly, researchers have actually made a balloon out of lead and it flew quite nicely.

I certainly hope it didn't flop.  I'm getting into it.  I think it's cool.

I don't think it flopped.  FFG seems to be intent on supporting it with lots of news up upcoming products.  Compare that to Runewars (a FFG boardgame I really like) which hasn't seen any news of expansions since it's release.

As for other points:

I don't think the 3 players thing is a real limitation.  One, I believe average game groups are 1 GM and 3 players or less.  I think the 1GM+4Player group is uncommon, and the 6+ player group is extremely rare.  

Two, the 3 player limit is illusory.  You can treat the deck of cards just like a Player's Handbook and have players write everything down on their character sheet just like any other RPG.  Think of the box set not just as the purchase of a PHB, but as the purchase of a PHB, a full set of power cards, monster tokens, and two sets of dice.

It's a very conventional RPG.  Once you get past the presentation (which is excellent and unique) the game is very much a standard RPG.  The whole "it's a boardgame" rant I see commonly in relation to the game is nothing more than a sign of willful ignorance.

And about the price.  I didn't find the price outrageous.  It was easily within my impulse buy range, and I'm far from rich.

It flopped with me, they should have stuck with the 2e model, besides the last few books released were getting really good and was wanting more.  I warned them before hand that hybrid RPs just don't work and now they're trying to retcon it so people who have 2e will come back, I say Piss-off FFG you are banned!

I have never seen anyone play it or talk about it, and almost never any product in store.

Which obviously doesn't mean anything given my area's less than networking group of gamers and all, but its clearly not taking the market by storm.

Quote from: Captain Rufus;397347I have never seen anyone play it or talk about it, and almost never any product in store.

Which obviously doesn't mean anything given my area's less than networking group of gamers and all, but its clearly not taking the market by storm.

Yup you're right it doesn't mean anything.  FFG says it's selling well and they have a planned release schedule into 2011 so it's popular enough for them.

Quote from: Tetsubo;394281Interestingly, researchers have actually made a balloon out of lead and it flew quite nicely.

Okay, so its an old cliche/metaphor I used.

 Lets just say the local folks who like Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying were pretty ticked off with the new version.


- Ed C.

Winds of Magic is in the shop, but its still an expensive proposition. Including the base set you're looking at around a ton (that's Londonese for £100) for the relatively compleat WFRP experience (from what I can gather).

I don't want FFG to fail; I rather like them even though their handling of the 40k property is a bit haphazard for my liking. But I find it hard to believe this project has proven successful.

Wow, a hundred quid is definitely more than I paid for any single other RPG product.