Quote from: Erik BoielleWe don't only make the Full Monty or romantic comedies with Hugh Grant.

Nothing more british than a Commando comic:-

Balls of British Steel mate.

Erik, you've just failed basic debating. My point that "Anyone who can claim to be British and still not get the glorious and very British humour of WFRP isn't really one of us" is in no way refuted by your example of other forms of British entertainment. Saying "X is an example of British humour" is not the same as saying "X, and only X is an example of British humour".

My argument was more along the lines of the classic "True Scotsman", whereby "no true British man fails to find the humour in WFRP entertaining". Sugesting that a "True British man" might find other things entertaining is entirely beside the point and only goes to show how little attention you are paying to people who are trying to address your concerns.

And for the record, neither The Fully Monty nor Hugh Grant are examples of the humour found in WFRP - again utterly pointless examples to bring up in your rebuttal. :rolleyes:

:eek:
That was my belated attempt at irony Trevelyan. I'm with you on everything. Sorry.

Quote from: TrevelyanAnd for the record, neither The Fully Monty nor Hugh Grant are examples of the humour found in WFRP - again utterly pointless examples to bring up in your rebuttal. :rolleyes:

Oh I don't know. The Full Monty has unemployed steel workers making the best of it in world beyond their control, while Hugh Grant does useless bumbling tit rather well.

Erik,

 You're getting boring.

 Either play the new WARHAMMER game when its released or don't. Linking to countless images of British military men from book and magaziine covers doesn't prove anything. (Except that you maybe have a man-crush on men in either armor or uniform.  ......)


- Ed C.

Piss off then- I, for one, find Erik quite entertaining. Furthermore, I presonally don't think that most poeple like to create experianced characters- a belief I will hold onto until someone provides me with some hard data that shows the opposite to be true.

Quote from: KoltarErik,

 You're getting boring.

 Either play the new WARHAMMER game when its released or don't. Linking to countless images of British military men from book and magaziine covers doesn't prove anything. (Except that you maybe have a man-crush on men in either armor or uniform.  ......)


- Ed C.

And that you have way too much time and dedication to searching for pictures of said men in armour/uniform.

Quote from: KoltarLinking to countless images of British military men from book and magaziine covers doesn't prove anything.

Its a comic. Certainly a strong ancestor of Warhammer.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6599139.stm

Quote(Except that you maybe have a man-crush on men in either armor or uniform.  ......)

It is no more, or less, homoerotic than westerns or wrestling.

Which is to say yes, very very gay indeed.

I present to you in picture form the reason that your style of warhammer would turn me away from the RPG (and did from the battle game):

My best friend got a hand on these little puppies and made them Chosen Khorne Knights with an Exalted Champion. Unless I pulled some serious Sun Tzu fu on this unit (5:1 against) I would lose every time.
The ultraviolence of these Knights intruding on a game whose strategy and level of thought you don't credit enough completely ruined the game for me.

Quote from: Erik BoielleAnyway, the only real difference is that you say 'I dispatch scouts to reconoiter the village' instead of I listen at the door' or, 'I charge with my heavy cavalry' instead of 'I hit him'.

I'm not disputing that an epic sourcebook for WFRP would be awesome. But mass battles as the default playstyle in a tabletop RPG has never been done before Reign (and who knows how successful that will be). What makes you think GW can suddenly make this fringe concept a hit like traditional WFRP has been?

Quote from: Erik BoielleYeah, but that means making World of Warhammer, not WFRP. WFRP was an odd concept.

I get the impression that you won't be happy until traditional WFRP is killed forever, so you can laugh in the faces of its fans, in retribution for all the failed WFRP games you've had scuttled after two sessions.

Quote from: Saskwach:eek:
That was my belated attempt at irony Trevelyan. I'm with you on everything. Sorry.

Ah. I missed that. :deflated:

Quote from: Erik BoilleOh I don't know. The Full Monty has unemployed steel workers making the best of it in world beyond their control, while Hugh Grant does useless bumbling tit rather well.

Once again I fear you've somewhat missed the point.

Quote from: AoSFurthermore, I presonally don't think that most poeple like to create experianced characters- a belief I will hold onto until someone provides me with some hard data that shows the opposite to be true.

No one ever made such a claim. All people have suggested is that it is easy to create an advanced character in WFRP if you want to play a gonzo level game, and that several posters here have done just that. The extent to which this practice is adopted by the world at large is irrelevant.

The ravenous, yawning chasm of Erik's miscomprehension is starting to suck in other posters. How long before this thread reaches some sort of critical mass and sucks the whole of the forum down with it?

QuoteWhat makes you think GW can suddenly make this fringe concept a hit like traditional WFRP has been?

Well, (disputing the meaning of hit), what I think they SHOULD do is just do D20 warhammer stuff complete with dungeon crawls and shopping lists of magic items. What I think would be more interesting is Epic Warhammer or Metal Warhammer. So, if it was feeding my kids I'd do the former, while as a hobby I'm pondering the latter.

Quote from: Herr Arnulfein retribution for all the failed WFRP games you've had scuttled after two sessions.

That and having to put up with fucking Didz for years.

If only that wanker hadn't slagged off the griffon...

Actually, it is more becuase of all the wasted time spent not doing anything in roleplaying games because my character wasn't up to doing the kinds of stories I like. Lying in the back of a car going 'I've fucking been fucking shot, man' and bleeding everywhere is fun once. After that, I'd just rather be getting on with the adventure. Which means acting like someone in a commando comic.

So yes, I do have a strong desire to piss on these games then set them on fire. So much wasted time!

I think they are a terrible mistake, and a triumph of wishful thinking over practicality.

Argh! All those years listening to NPCs and running away from anything interesting!

Quote from: Erik BoielleSo, I think tactics that worked on me, him and everyone else would seem a good strategy neh?

It had me going for a couple of years, until I started approaching my mid-20s.  Even then, it was only the minis that grabbed my attention, not the (largely) inept drawings and paintings.

So, turning the argument around, how is it that GW lost me as a customer?

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaSo, turning the argument around, how is it that GW lost me as a customer?

They only need to care if it would be easier to sell to you than people who like their stuff.

Do you think it would be?

Quote from: TrevelyanErik has yet to offer a counter argument beyond simply saying that he doesn't like to create experienced characters and/or doesn't believe that anyone else does either.

And yet he's declared his admiration for HeroQuest, which does just such a thing.  Probably the significant difference between liking one and not the other is that HeroQuest wasn't titled Warhammer.

!i!

Quote from: AosPiss off then- I, for one, find Erik quite entertaining. Furthermore, I presonally don't think that most poeple like to create experianced characters- a belief I will hold onto until someone provides me with some hard data that shows the opposite to be true.

All evidence on this topic is anecdotal. The last time I played a D&D campaign starting at 1st level was maybe 10 years ago, and almost everyone I know does the same (3rd-5th being the norm). Your experiences are likely different, but there's no way we're going to convince one another of our respective opinions in the absence of the hard data you requested.

And this is where Erik's argument fundamentally fails. He's claiming universal truths of WFRP gaming without even the personal experience necessary to back it up. He neither knows or understands the system and it's appeal, and thinks that the same juvenalia that draws kids into the battle game will work it's magic on the RPG. My contention would be that it's the cool figures and the chance to compete against one's mates that actually does that, all wrapped up in the tribal conformity that GW emforces over tournament play.