A surprise and clever move for FFG - http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3112
I can't see how a $60 product with all of the chaff can cover the same scope as the original campaign, but they do expect it to cover at least 30 sessions. I see its broken into 3 adventures and it looks very different in terms of story.
Still interesting.
I think Rince's head just exploded.
Colour me unsurprised. It's WotC all over again. Outreach to fans of previous editions.
Quote from: Skywalker;518387A surprise and clever move for FFG - http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3112
I can't see how a $60 product with all of the chaff can cover the same scope as the original campaign
Oh dear gods, no! I'm hoping that is a sign that FFG will drop WFRP $$$E after this! Though, perhaps I'm too hopeful?
Why would I spend $60 on it (caresses large WFRP 1st Editon collection). Firstly I'd have to pick up the box set for the rules (the books for WFRP 3rd Edition were f-ing awful by the way) costing me $99! Furthermore, I'd need whatever rules FFG 'suggested' I need just to run this new Enemy Within; which I'd imagine would include most of their splat boxed sets - costing more than a third world country goes through in an annum. With this; I'm out!. Thank you for the thought but it does not change the fact that the 3rd Edition is an expensive elitist game, that is far, far, far removed from what THAT classic campaign is and was.
Oh and I also get the feeling of another classic British re-make done by Hollywood; namely: The Wicker Man. Have you seen what happened with that. What Nicolas Cage did to THAT film. Well if you haven't than you are lucky; for saying it is an festering pile of steaming cack is an insult to steaming piles of festering cack.
Quote from: elfandghost;518420Oh and I also get the feeling of another classic British re-make done by Hollywood; namely: The Wicker Man. Have you seen what happened with that. What Nicolas Cage did to THAT film. Well if you haven't than you are lucky; for saying it is an festering pile of steaming cack is an insult to steaming piles of festering cack.
While there's no defending the Wicker Man remake, did you see the Wicker Tree movie that came out recently? It was sad to see the guy behind the original Wicker Man poo all over that film's legacy with a new (and fairly tepid) sequel.
Quote from: elfandghost;518420With this; I'm out!.
As a matter of interest, are you in? You post makes it sound like you weren't.
Quote from: misterguignol;518423While there's no defending the Wicker Man remake, did you see the Wicker Tree movie that came out recently? It was sad to see the guy behind the original Wicker Man poo all over that film's legacy with a new (and fairly tepid) sequel.
I thought they'd dumped that pre-production? In fact I had some friends who were working on the sets and costumes who were laid off. Indeed I'm sure it was going to be called Cowboys for Christ after the book?
Anyway; the book wasn't great at all. It was a real pain to read. I'm surprised they went ahead with the film in the end; but I will see it - if I can! There has been no advertising of this over here (UK) at least to my knowledge.
Quote from: elfandghost;518420Why would I spend $60 on it (caresses large WFRP 1st Editon collection). Firstly I'd have to pick up the box set for the rules (the books for WFRP 3rd Edition were f-ing awful by the way) costing me $99! Furthermore, I'd need whatever rules FFG 'suggested' I need just to run this new Enemy Within; which I'd imagine would include most of their splat boxed sets - costing more than a third world country goes through in an annum. With this; I'm out!. Thank you for the thought but it does not change the fact that the 3rd Edition is an expensive elitist game, that is far, far, far removed from what THAT classic campaign is and was.
(http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215471989_GKZWD-L-2.jpg)
Quote from: Skywalker;518425As a matter of interest, are you in? You post makes it sound like you weren't.
Actually at first, when I heard I was breifly excited. This was before I thought of the cost and what it will turn out like. There is no way it will have the weirdness levels of the 1st Edition, the artwork or that general feel that I cannot place; perhaps that is nostalgia?
Quote from: Justin Alexander;518429(http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/215471989_GKZWD-L-2.jpg)
Too right! Who said I'm a captalist?
Quote from: elfandghost;518427I thought they'd dumped that pre-production? In fact I had some friends who were working on the sets and costumes who were laid off. Indeed I'm sure it was going to be called Cowboys for Christ after the book?
Anyway; the book wasn't great at all. It was a real pain to read. I'm surprised they went ahead with the film in the end; but I will see it - if I can! There has been no advertising of this over here (UK) at least to my knowledge.
Sadly, it exists: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0323808/
Quote from: elfandghost;518430Actually at first, when I heard I was breifly excited. This was before I thought of the cost and what it will turn out like. There is no way it will have the weirdness levels of the 1st Edition, the artwork or that general feel that I cannot place; perhaps that is nostalgia?
So, you're not really getting out then. :)
FWIW I dipped my toe in and got out a while back. I don't recommend getting in myself.
Quote from: Skywalker;518435So, you're not really getting out then. :)
FWIW I dipped my toe in and got out a while back. I don't recommend getting in myself.
I have the 3rd Edition books. Which read more like this: you
could play without all the f-ing tokens, bits and pieces and what not
BUT you're going to be spending the rest of your days cutting out bits of card and paper that will look like shit SO buy the boxed sets; you can't really play with these books you fool!
This is brand new campaign, nothing tying it to the original except dropping the name "Enemy Within" and "Graeme Davis". Oh, and it will be set in the Empire. :D They can't follow any of the storylines in the original, most of the people and events have already been retconned out or changed substantially.
Quote from: CRKrueger;518446This is brand new campaign, nothing tying it to the original except dropping the name "Enemy Within" and "Graeme Davis". Oh, and it will be set in the Empire. :D They can't follow any of the storylines in the original, most of the people and events have already been retconned out or changed substantially.
The adventure boxes they've put out so far have been quality products. I probably won't buy this one though for the simple fact that I've got enough WFRP 3 stuff to last me a good while that I hadn't touched yet.
Quote from: kryyst;518453The adventure boxes they've put out so far have been quality products. I probably won't buy this one though for the simple fact that I've got enough WFRP 3 stuff to last me a good while that I hadn't touched yet.
I have Gathering Storm for the purpose of running it with 2e. I agree the adventure seems pretty cool.
I will probably get The Enemy Within for the same reason. It looks like it will be different enough to allow me to run my old group through it, without just replaying the original version which we all remember.
Now I know how those kids who watched original Star Wars in '77 feel, watching the "digitally enhanced" versions lately. Or new Indiana Jones movie.
http://nooooooooooooooo.com/
Enemy Within was the first thing from Warhammer I had read, before reading the corebook for 1e, because my father had a lot of supplements but no corebook. In other words, thanks a lot, FFG, for proceeding to spew vomit onto my childhood.
This is at least an admission that they know that their crap will never be as good as Enemy Within.
HHHHNNNNNGGGGGHHHHHKKKKKKRRRRRAAAARRRGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!
FFG is part of the Roleplaying Axis of Evil. I hate what they've done to WFRP.
Quote from: kryyst;518453The adventure boxes they've put out so far have been quality products. I probably won't buy this one though for the simple fact that I've got enough WFRP 3 stuff to last me a good while that I hadn't touched yet.
They are done by a company who believes that "Full Draw", as in drawing the crossbow or a bow with a true maximal strength (I will not bother the idiocy of crossbow in this one) will allow you greater damage.
.
.
.
I do make characters with greater strength deal greater damage with a Longbow, but should you not require a a "special action" (aka tell the GM) if you are NOT drawing the bow with your full strength?
This is going to suck so bad...
Quote from: Benoist;518502This is going to suck so bad...
I suspect so.
Tremble, mortals, and despair! FFG has come to this world.
Quote from: Rincewind1;518494They are done by a company who believes that "Full Draw", as in drawing the crossbow or a bow with a true maximal strength (I will not bother the idiocy of crossbow in this one) will allow you greater damage.
.
.
.
I do make characters with greater strength deal greater damage with a Longbow, but should you not require a a "special action" (aka tell the GM) if you are NOT drawing the bow with your full strength?
Every game has it's things.
Quote from: Skywalker;518387A surprise and clever move for FFG - http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3112
I can't see how a $60 product with all of the chaff can cover the same scope as the original campaign, but they do expect it to cover at least 30 sessions. I see its broken into 3 adventures and it looks very different in terms of story.
Still interesting.
Fuck me, that reeks of desperation.
Quote from: jadrax;518557Fuck me, that reeks of desperation.
First "Print on Demand" card expansions because they're not selling enough for a print run and now a "Please come back, old fuckers" campaign.
Shove a fork up their ass, they're done.
Quote from: CRKrueger;518571First "Print on Demand" card expansions because they're not selling enough for a print run and now a "Please come back, old fuckers" campaign.
Shove a fork up their ass, they're done.
Well, POD is the rather logical thing to do if you aren't DnD or BRP or Warhammer.
Oh wait.
Kidding aside - POD is pretty reasonable for RPGs. But this is a vain hope that perhaps some foolish enough from the OS of Warhammer will buy it.
Quote from: CRKrueger;518571First "Print on Demand" card expansions because they're not selling enough for a print run and now a "Please come back, old fuckers" campaign.
Shove a fork up their ass, they're done.
Well, i tried the reasonable explanation, but this'll do!
In the end, these guys will just have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that RPGs are their own thing, and that inserting story-bullshit, board-game crap and the like into the medium, especially the Classics, just leads to complete failure.
Thank you, Forge guys!
Quote from: Rincewind1;518572But this is a vain hope that perhaps some foolish enough from the OS of Warhammer will buy it.
This is completely in line with their whole strategy for WFRP -
1. Slap a well-recognised RPG brand on a box.
2. Fill said box with crap.
3. Charge far too much for it.
4. Profit!
It's a bit like strip-mining - they didn't create the resource; they're just exploiting it.
Basically, WFRP3e is no different from blood diamonds.
Quote from: One Horse Town;518397Colour me unsurprised. It's WotC all over again. Outreach to fans of previous editions.
Well, there's a difference between Andy Collins (a 3e WotC guy) or Ari Marmell (a d20 freelancer) rewriting Tomb of Horrors for 4th edition, and WotC asking Gary Gygax to write it (which they didn't).
At least FFG went back to one of the original authors, Graeme Davis, who's going to be co-writing and/or developing it. He says more about it on his blog,
http://graemedavis.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/the-enemy-within-again/
where he clarifies inter alia that it's not going to be a conversion at all. Think Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, and I think you get an idea of where they are going with this.
That apart, I'm frankly amazed at the sort of hate and doomsaying this announcement draws. Because they go the route of 'Return to the Temple' it's writing on the wall that Warhammer 3rd is dead? Geez - did you say that too when Monte wrote something similar for 3.0? No? So what's the reasoning here? Another bout of wishful thinking?
I have no idea.
As for myself, I've just been in touch with our Deathwatch GM earlier today and we're going to run this campaign later this year. While I don't have high hopes, I look forward to it, and I'll certainly post play experience with it on this board.
This changes my non-interest in 3E not one bit. *shrug*
In more exciting WFRP news, I just filled in the last couple issues of Warpstone I was missing!
Quote from: Windjammer;518709Well, there's a difference between Andy Collins (a 3e WotC guy) or Ari Marmell (a d20 freelancer) rewriting Tomb of Horrors for 4th edition, and WotC asking Gary Gygax to write it (which they didn't).
At least FFG went back to one of the original authors, Graeme Davis, who's going to be co-writing and/or developing it. He says more about it on his blog,
http://graemedavis.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/the-enemy-within-again/
where he clarifies inter alia that it's not going to be a conversion at all. Think Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, and I think you get an idea of where they are going with this.
That apart, I'm frankly amazed at the sort of hate and doomsaying this announcement draws. Because they go the route of 'Return to the Temple' it's writing on the wall that Warhammer 3rd is dead? Geez - did you say that too when Monte wrote something similar for 3.0? No? So what's the reasoning here? Another bout of wishful thinking?
I have no idea.
As for myself, I've just been in touch with our Deathwatch GM earlier today and we're going to run this campaign later this year. While I don't have high hopes, I look forward to it, and I'll certainly post play experience with it on this board.
I've never understood anger and hate over a game one doesn't play. I suspect that those of us who don't get riled by stuff like this are incapable of understanding those that do.
Quote from: Skywalker;518387A surprise and clever move for FFG - http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3112
I can't see how a $60 product with all of the chaff can cover the same scope as the original campaign, but they do expect it to cover at least 30 sessions. I see its broken into 3 adventures and it looks very different in terms of story.
Still interesting.
How in the hell did FFG get the rights to The Enemy Within (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIRHJWNgPBI)?
And if there are no fucking barges sunk in the making or playing of this campaign, then God has truly abandoned us.
Quote from: TheHistorian;518744In more exciting WFRP news, I just filled in the last couple issues of Warpstone I was missing!
Warpstone 30 should be out soon - now that's something to look forward too.
(Although tbf I would say that, I wrote one of the articles in it).
Quote from: Benoist;518602In the end, these guys will just have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that RPGs are their own thing, and that inserting story-bullshit, board-game crap and the like into the medium, especially the Classics, just leads to complete failure.
Thank you, Forge guys!
Precisely.
RPGPundit
Quote from: StormBringer;518750How in the hell did FFG get the rights to The Enemy Within (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIRHJWNgPBI)?
And if there are no fucking barges sunk in the making or playing of this campaign, then God has truly abandoned us.
There will be a special card for the DM "Tap it to sink the player's barge".
I'm holding out hope that 4th edition will be good like even editions good, odd editions bad, like Star Trek.:)
It doesn't exactly map out but you get the idea.
Quote from: Rincewind1;518919There will be a special card for the DM "Tap it to sink the player's barge".
Is that a blue or green card? :)
Quote from: Windjammer;518709Well, there's a difference between Andy Collins (a 3e WotC guy) or Ari Marmell (a d20 freelancer) rewriting Tomb of Horrors for 4th edition, and WotC asking Gary Gygax to write it (which they didn't).
I'm not sure how much good it would have done. Gygax was dead by the time 4th Edition was released.
Quote from: Justin Alexander;518931I'm not sure how much good it would have done. Gygax was dead by the time 4th Edition was released.
Yes I'm aware of that. I was speaking
hypothetically, though your point stands in that I failed to imply that in my earlier post.
Besides, it's even more hypothetical than assuming Gygax being alive then, in that WotC successfully contracting him to write for 4e seems unlikely in its own right. Some of Gygax' criticisms of 3e - dissolution of the (class) archetypes and the alignments - would apply even more forcefully to 4e, and I'm not sure he'd have lent his name to the system, much less dedicated his creative energies to it.
Quote from: StormBringer;518928Is that a blue or green card? :)
Brown, like the colour of the game.
Quote from: Windjammer;518954Yes I'm aware of that. I was speaking hypothetically, though your point stands in that I failed to imply that in my earlier post.
Apologies. That post should have had a smiley appended to it.
As a fan of WHFRP3e, and an active follower of the line, I'll just say that I skip on the adventures. I won't be picking this one up either. I'm just waiting for Hero's Call.
Quote from: Windjammer;518709That apart, I'm frankly amazed at the sort of hate and doomsaying this announcement draws.
Amazed? Really?
Quote from: Windjammer;518709So what's the reasoning here? Another bout of wishful thinking?
Got it in one. It pisses off the grognards that WFRP 3 is proving to be a popular game, with a strong player base and a steady release of supplements. Because that means a lot of other people like things they don't like.
No, better to imagine that it's a move of desperation on FFG's part. Never mind that it's probably been part of the plan since they took over WFRP in the first place. Or that a lot of people who play WFRP 3, and who will buy the new Enemy Within, are people who played earlier editions.
Quote from: Benoist;518602In the end, these guys will just have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that RPGs are their own thing, and that inserting story-bullshit, board-game crap and the like into the medium, especially the Classics, just leads to complete failure.
WFRP 3 is doing pretty well, by all accounts. Better than WFRP 2, certainly. Can you name some non-D&D RPGs that are doing better?
As for the boardgame stuff, what, in your playing experience, do you find boardgamey about WFRP 3?
Personally, I find it plays much easier without miniatures and a battle grid than D&D 3E does. That makes it less boardgamey in my eyes. Putting rules and monsters on cards is simply a matter of convenience, especially for groups like mine where the players don't own the books and will never take the rules home to study. Now they each have a few cards with all the mechanics they need to know right in front of them.
And there's nothing especially storygamey about WFRP 3. In fact, it was WFRP 2 that gave us fate points, a pretty blatant narrative mechanic. But maybe Black Industry was infiltrated with Forgists as well, eh?
Quote from: Haffrung;519996WFRP 3 is doing pretty well, by all accounts. Better than WFRP 2, certainly. Can you name some non-D&D RPGs that are doing better?
Maybe in Painthuffer Land.
Quote from: Haffrung;519996WFRP 3 is doing pretty well, by all accounts. Better than WFRP 2, certainly. Can you name some non-D&D RPGs that are doing better?
The 40k games outsell it, from the looks of things.
QuoteAs for the boardgame stuff, what, in your playing experience, do you find boardgamey about WFRP 3?
Speaking only for myself, I don't find that 3e plays like a boardgame, but rather that it has a set-up too close to FFG's boardgames with the chits, trackers, and stand-up figures. The problems this poses for me are: too much space is taken up at the table, the cost is exorbitant for less actual gaming material, and it's the least portable Warhammer FRP game.
QuoteAnd there's nothing especially storygamey about WFRP 3. In fact, it was WFRP 2 that gave us fate points, a pretty blatant narrative mechanic. But maybe Black Industry was infiltrated with Forgists as well, eh?
Fate points started with 1e, actually.
Quote from: misterguignol;519999The 40k games outsell it, from the looks of things.
Speaking only for myself, I don't find that 3e plays like a boardgame, but rather that it has a set-up too close to FFG's boardgames with the chits, trackers, and stand-up figures. The problems this poses for me are: too much space is taken up at the table, the cost is exorbitant for less actual gaming material, and it's the least portable Warhammer FRP game.
Fate points started with 1e, actually.
TL;DR: WFRP 1e/2e do all things that WFRP 3 do, and much better, far cheaper.
Quote from: Haffrung;519996WFRP 3 is doing pretty well, by all accounts.
By whose accounts? The same people who told you 4e D&D was a smashing success?
Quote from: misterguignol;519999The problems this poses for me are: too much space is taken up at the table, the cost is exorbitant for less actual gaming material, and it's the least portable Warhammer FRP game.
It doesn't take up nearly as much room as very popular FFG games such as Arkham Horror, Twilight Imperium, or Descent. And it's not much more expensive than any of those games either.
Given the growing popularity and health of the boardgaming market they've cultivated (all those games have sold 30,000 to 50,000 copies), I can understand that FFG doesn't consider a small footprint, portability, and <$50 price point to be especially important design and market considerations.
Quote from: misterguignol;519999Fate points started with 1e, actually.
Ah, so the Forge taint began way back with Games Workshop.
Quote from: Benoist;520014By whose accounts? The same people who told you 4e D&D was a smashing success?
By whose account is the game failing, as you implied in the post I cited?
Quote from: Haffrung;520019It doesn't take up nearly as much room as very popular FFG games such as Arkham Horror, Twilight Imperium, or Descent. And it's not much more expensive than any of those games either.
And yet you still get less gameable content than you did with the old hardback, it's more expensive than ever, and it takes up more room than the average rpg because of all the widgets.
Surely you can see that comparing an RPG against Arkham Horror is damning with faint praise? It's like saying, "Well, it doesn't take up your WHOLE kitchen table...just half!"
QuoteGiven the growing popularity and health of the boardgaming market they've cultivated (all those games have sold 30,000 to 50,000 copies), I can understand that FFG doesn't consider a small footprint, portability, and <$50 price point to be especially important design and market considerations.
They might not, but I consider paying that much for less of a game I used to get to be a turn-off as a customer. Surely that isn't hard to understand?
Call me when you have an actual answer, Haff.
Except that board games are quite different then RPGs. For RPGs, the need for little materials other then, by dire necessity, pen and sheet of paper, was always a major good factor.
Also - board games, by merit of board alone, usually will need certain amount of space anyway.
Not to mention that board games & RPGs overlap much less then it'd seem.
Another postcard from Painthuffing Land at 11.
Quote from: Haffrung;520019It doesn't take up nearly as much room as very popular FFG games such as Arkham Horror, Twilight Imperium, or Descent. And it's not much more expensive than any of those games either.
Given the growing popularity and health of the boardgaming market they've cultivated (all those games have sold 30,000 to 50,000 copies), I can understand that FFG doesn't consider a small footprint, portability, and <$50 price point to be especially important design and market considerations.
Ah, so the Forge taint began way back with Games Workshop.
The Forge people travelled back in time and tried to win the war influencing Gary Gygax, but they failed because the wargamers killed them first. So they made another attempt with GW in Britain, of course :D
Quote from: Imperator;520029The Forge people travelled back in time and tried to win the war influencing Gary Gygax, but they failed because the wargamers killed them first. So they made another attempt with GW in Britain, of course :D
That reminds me of some film's plot...Time Cop?
Quote from: Benoist;520023Call me when you have an actual answer, Haff.
You made the assertion that the Enemy Within is proof that WFRP 3 is a failure. So how about you go first?
Quote from: Haffrung;520031You made the assertion that the Enemy Within is proof that WFRP 3 is a failure. So how about you go first?
I'm sorry I gave you the impression I gave a fuck about this exchange.
Quote from: Imperator;520029The Forge people travelled back in time and tried to win the war influencing Gary Gygax, but they failed because the wargamers killed them first. So they made another attempt with GW in Britain, of course :D
Come with me if you want to game.
Quote from: Benoist;520034I'm sorry I gave you the impression I gave a fuck about this exchange.
You have been one of the - if not
the - most vocal person in this thread who said Enemy Within is going to "suck". Moreover, you were the one to say that this product will prove that "inserting story-bullshit, board-game crap and the like into the medium" sc. Warhammer RPG will prove "beyond a shadow of doubt" that this all "just leads to complete failure."
Haffrung came really late to the party and admittedly made the mistake of putting a negation sign on
one of your statements, by challenging you on the basis of you calling the system a 'failure'. Maybe he misread you in that you didn't mean commercial failure, I don't know.
In any case, to rebounce the question on the questioner and then say you don't "give a fuck" about the entire exchange?
I think we can expect better of you.
You can. Just not today, and not on this particular topic.
It's perfectly acceptable, in my opinion, to be completely irrational when it comes to FFG's heretical desecration of the WFRP heritage.
They didn't break your game they made another. Its selling well enough for them that they are producing more content and have a large enough fan base that keeps buying it and playing it happily. Not to mention wanting more. The fact that a bunch of fist shaking grognards is offended is laughable. Go pack up your toys and go home.
Quote from: Dodger;520138It's perfectly acceptable, in my opinion, to be completely irrational when it comes to FFG's heretical desecration of the WFRP heritage.
I'm just waiting for the new Call of Cthulhu fighting top game.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pIrlytPOB1o/TKdrXNfUu0I/AAAAAAAAAoc/87g9AD17E4A/s1600/BattlingTopsBox.jpg)
Oh how dare we dislike the shittiest edition of WFRP in history!!1
Quote from: Rincewind1;520196Oh how dare we dislike the shittiest edition of WFRP in history!!1
How many of the haters have even played WFRP 3?
Quote from: kryyst;520153Go pack up your toys and go home.
Or what?
Quote from: Haffrung;520201How many of the haters have even played WFRP 3?
I don't need to play it to know that it's shite.
Much like I don't need to stab myself in the face with a steak knife to know that doing so would be a bad idea.
You should feel free to try it, though. :D
Quote from: Haffrung;520201How many of the haters have even played WFRP 3?
I did. And I'm not a hater. I just dislike this piece of shit, as the money invested in it would better serve, for example, reprinting 1e.
Quote from: Rincewind1;520219I did. And I'm not a hater. I just dislike this piece of shit, as the money invested in it would better serve, for example, reprinting 1e.
I know a place where you can get a copy, if it's hard to find in your neck of the woods.
Quote from: Haffrung;520222I know a place where you can get a copy, if it's hard to find in your neck of the woods.
I have one used. I'd want a new one, and not just of the corebook, but especially the true Enemy Within.
The only thing 3e shares with 1e is the name and the shitty binding.
Quote from: Dodger;520202Or what?
Or nothing - go play the version you like. Haters gotta hate blah blah blah...
Quote from: kryyst;520225Or nothing - go play the version you like. Haters gotta hate blah blah blah...
And blahers gotta blah...
Quote from: Dodger;520227And blahers gotta blah...
Just following your trend of useless chatter. This threads been derailed since about the 2nd post.
Quote from: Rincewind1;520223The only thing 3e shares with 1e is the name and the shitty binding.
And at least one author, Graeme Davis.
Quote from: Skywalker;520271And at least one author, Graeme Davis.
Supplement's author. He was not part of core rules squad for 1e nor 3e, nor 2e I believe. Admittedly, his adventures are great in 1e, and definitely one of strong points of it.
Which is why I'd not call him a sell - out, it's a bit sad he just sat down and writes "Enemy Within 2", while FFG not even bothered to call it "EW 2" or "Enemy Within Once Again" Or "Return of Enemy Within" or "Enemy Within For The Shitty Edition".
No, it's exactly Enemy Within. Which means "Enemy Within: Be As Cool As Grognards, While Playing Our Mechanics".
Not that you couldn't convert EW to 3e mechanics anyway, but then again - if you have it, why bother buying 3e?
Quote from: Rincewind1;520274Supplement's author. He was not part of core rules squad for 1e nor 3e, nor 2e I believe. Admittedly, his adventures are great in 1e, and definitely one of strong points of it.
Graeme Davis is listed as one of the 5 authors of WFRP1e corebook, as well as The Enemy Within, Shadows over Bogenhafen, Death on the Reik and Power Behind the Throne.
Quote from: Skywalker;520284Graeme Davis is listed as one of the 5 authors of WFRP1e corebook, as well as The Enemy Within, Shadows over Bogenhafen, Death on the Reik and Power Behind the Throne.
Fair enough and my mistake. Although I think he was mostly the "Additional Notes" from time of Death on the Reik. Your point still being? I doubt he had a hand in 3e's mechanics.
Quote from: Rincewind1;520288Fair enough and my mistake. Although I think he was mostly the "Additional Notes" from time of Death on the Reik. Your point still being? I doubt he had a hand in 3e's mechanics.
My only point is that 1e and 3e share more than the name and the shitty binding.
Quote from: Skywalker;520291My only point is that 1e and 3e share more than the name and the shitty binding.
Sure. They share two names and shitty binding. Although I'd still dispute Davis' involvement with 3e and therefore their "sharing" of him with 1e.
If Monte Cook would write (or if he did write) an adventure module for 4e, would that make him suddenly a co - author of it? No. And I'd say that most people'd associate him not with 4e, despite writing a module for it.
Interestingly, I see Graeme Davis also wrote the Edge of Night scenario for WFRP3e.
Quote from: Skywalker;520298Interestingly, I see Graeme Davis also wrote the Edge of Night scenario for WFRP3e.
Isn't Edge of Night a Lady Gaga song?
Quote from: misterguignol;520357Isn't Edge of Night a Lady Gaga song?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43RePKdsfBE
Quote from: misterguignol;520357Isn't Edge of Night a Lady Gaga song?
No. Its a Hobbit song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jY9dQ8hUi7U
Enemy Within is a Rush song FTW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I06T6M6R0Cc
Quote from: Skywalker;520361Enemy Within is a Rush song FTW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I06T6M6R0Cc
I heard it's also a name of some great RPG campaign for some obscure system that will get a remake for some shitty later edition of that game.
Quote from: Rincewind1;520362I heard it's also a name of some great RPG campaign for some obscure system that will get a remake for some shitty later edition of that game.
You couldn't resist, huh? ;)
Quote from: Skywalker;520370You couldn't resist, huh? ;)
Of course not! Admittedly, I am of course joking right now. I have no interest in 3e, but if you enjoy it - great. Just don't rave that older editions were "broken" or something (I know you, Skywalker, would never) or I'll cock - slap you ;). I'm probably one of worst Warhammer's grogs, because to me, even 2e doesn't cut the mustard the way 1e did.
My main qualm with this is that they use the EXACTLY same name, which, for me, is a bit of a stinker - the film industry is already a festering wound of remakes. Must the RPG industry consign it's fate the same way?
tl;dr
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7hhmuskHkE5vRbyTqvFu_zO-zhlmZnNtUARoBebL8Tfw_CmhjENzvR2fsWA)
QuoteCurrently Active Users: ( members and guests)
Threads: 19,218, Posts: 502,009, Members: 4,293
Welcome to our newest member, GraemeDavis
Someone is either trolling, or this thread is gonna get interesting soon.
Quote from: Rincewind1;520274Supplement's author. He was not part of core rules squad for 1e nor 3e, nor 2e I believe. Admittedly, his adventures are great in 1e, and definitely one of strong points of it.
Which is why I'd not call him a sell - out, it's a bit sad he just sat down and writes "Enemy Within 2", while FFG not even bothered to call it "EW 2" or "Enemy Within Once Again" Or "Return of Enemy Within" or "Enemy Within For The Shitty Edition".
No, it's exactly Enemy Within. Which means "Enemy Within: Be As Cool As Grognards, While Playing Our Mechanics".
Not that you couldn't convert EW to 3e mechanics anyway, but then again - if you have it, why bother buying 3e?
I was never involved in developing the rules for any of the three editions. For 1e, as you say, I focused on adventures and supplements.
For 2e, Green Ronin contracted me to write Ashes of Middenheim and the intro adventure in the core rulebook. Ashes was to a very tight brief, as I recall, since they already had the campaign planned out and just wanted someone to provide the actual words.
For 3e, the brief was a little looser. For Edge of Night, I was told the adventure had to involve Skaven and a masked ball in a noble house, and I filled in from there. So you can blame me for the Ubersreik source material, the political setup, and re-using the Three Feathers concept for the ball.
The new EW adventure is in four parts, and I was contracted to write chapters 2 and 4. Once again, I was handed a fairly comprehensive brief that included the overall plotline and the key NPCs, along with Dave Allen's outlines for chapters 1 and 3.
As for calling it The Enemy Within, that was of course FFG's decision. No doubt they wanted it to attract attention, and it has certainly succeeded in that. It does follow the themes of the original, but it's all-new material. Maybe The Enemy Within 2, or Returns, or whatever might have been a better title - that can be argued until Satan skates to work without ever reaching a conclusion.
And am I a sell-out? It's certainly true that I have written for all three editions. It's also true that I haven't written anything for 1e since 2e came out, nor for 2e since 3e came out. That's because I make my living writing for games, and tabletop rpgs will never make anyone rich so I can't afford to write unless I get paid. So, guilty on those counts, I guess. If anyone wanted to pay me 6 cents a word or more to write 1e material, I'd happily do that as well.
But - perhaps because I'm more interested in story than in mechanics - I've always liked to think that the adventures I write could be run using the rules from any edition, given a bit of work on the part of the GM.
I blogged about the old EW and the new one at http://graemedavis.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/the-enemy-within-again/ a few days ago. Be warned, I don't get into the edition wars, and I never will, but I do chart the history of the original campaign for anyone who might be interested.
I love your work, and hope you get a gig writing for a system that I actually like soon. Your one of the Godfathers of 1st/2nd ed WFRP, and that's my all time favourite rpg.
thanks for joining in, mr. davis. i had no idea the original TEW campaign was never officially wrapped up. And your mention that you've written TEW2 (well, your parts, anyway, lol) to be easily understandable and adaptable to 1/2e makes that product appealing to this wfrp grognard, thanks :)
Welcome, Graeme! :)
Quote from: GraemeDavis;520497And am I a sell-out? It's certainly true that I have written for all three editions. It's also true that I haven't written anything for 1e since 2e came out, nor for 2e since 3e came out. That's because I make my living writing for games, and tabletop rpgs will never make anyone rich so I can't afford to write unless I get paid. So, guilty on those counts, I guess. If anyone wanted to pay me 6 cents a word or more to write 1e material, I'd happily do that as well.
Well sure, you are a sell-out: what you describe is basically mercenary work. "As long as you guys are paying me 6 cents a word, I'll write for you." You seem to have a very good reason to do so (i.e. paying the bills, feed the family), but yeah, that does make you a mercenary, a sellsword. So long as you don't have a problem with people recognizing that fact, it's all good, I guess.
Quote from: Benoist;520534You seem to have a very good reason to do so (i.e. paying the bills, feed the family), but yeah, that does make you a mercenary, a sellsword.
To be fair, is there an RPG writer who isn't? I guess if you have your own system or company and write solely for that, but how many designers like that are there? Out of those how many actually support themselves just on the RPG sales, probably zero.
Quote from: CRKrueger;520535Is there an RPG writer who isn't? I guess if you have your own system or company and write solely for that, but how many designers like that are there? Out of those how many actually support themselves just on the RPG sales, probably zero.
Not that many, I'd wager.
Quote from: CRKrueger;520535To be fair, is there an RPG writer who isn't? I guess if you have your own system or company and write solely for that, but how many designers like that are there? Out of those how many actually support themselves just on the RPG sales, probably zero.
I'm sure there are plenty of RPG freelancers who cling to the hope of one day making a living from their writing, even if they aren't currently.
I hope for the sake of the industry that there aren't too many freelancers still trying to bang out 4,000 words/day just to pay rent.
Thanks for response, Greame. I still love original EW, and no, as I said - I do not consider you a sell - out, because generally speaking, RPG industry is just too much based on editions treadmill to consider someone writing for other edition then Someone's Beloved a sell - out. I hope you do make the best out of new EW. But I still find the title in bad taste, and my money won't go to it.
Cheers, and good luck.
Quote from: Benoist;520534So long as you don't have a problem with people recognizing that fact, it's all good, I guess.
Calling a professional doing work for money a "sell-out" as if ti was something impure is baffling, anyway. How many people is working without a salary? Is it wrong that a person does a work for money?
Quote from: Benoist;520534Welcome, Graeme! :)
Well sure, you are a sell-out: what you describe is basically mercenary work. "As long as you guys are paying me 6 cents a word, I'll write for you." You seem to have a very good reason to do so (i.e. paying the bills, feed the family), but yeah, that does make you a mercenary, a sellsword. So long as you don't have a problem with people recognizing that fact, it's all good, I guess.
I think the word you're looking for is 'professional'.
Quote from: Imperator;520572Calling a professional doing work for money a "sell-out" as if ti was something impure is baffling, anyway. How many people is working without a salary? Is it wrong that a person does a work for money?
No, it's no intrinsically wrong to do some work for money. Who said that?
It's the fact that you'd do ANY work for money that would make you a sellsword.
"Selling out" is the compromising of integrity, morality, or principles in exchange for money or "success" (however defined).When you say "I'd write whatever, as long as you give me 6 cents a word," you technically are putting the paycheck before any considerations based on principle, integrity, what-have-you. As I said: if you don't have an ethical problem with that, then all's fine, as far as you're concerned.
It's a question of priorities: if you got to pay the bills at the end of the month and have to ignore whatever ethical beliefs you might otherwise have had, so be it. When you have to, you have to, right? But that doesn't change the fact you're being a mercenary for hire, basically.
Quote from: Haffrung;520575I think the word you're looking for is 'professional'.
Yeah, right. In your bizarro world maybe.
Quote from: Benoist;520576When you say "I'd write whatever, as long as you give me 6 cents a word," you technically are putting the paycheck before any considerations based on principle, integrity, what-have-you. As I said: if you don't have an ethical problem with that, then all's fine, as far as you're concerned.
Everyone who makes a living from writing (aka 'professionals'), especially freelance writing, lives by that principle; they cobble together a livelihood by writing pretty much whatever anyone will pay them for. Fussy writers don't pay the rent.
If you prefer the integrity of amateur writers, then good for you. But why should commercial enterprises should operate under amateur principles. Surely there are reams and reams of amateur RPG material for you to enjoy, without getting your neck out of joint over what professionals choose to do in the commercial realm.
Quote from: Haffrung;520580Everyone who makes a living from writing (aka 'professionals'), especially freelance writing, lives by that principle; they cobble together a livelihood by writing pretty much whatever anyone will pay them for. Fussy writers don't pay the rent.
That makes them all swords for hire. Where is the problem, here?
Quote from: Haffrung;520580If you prefer the integrity of amateur writers, then good for you. But I don't see why you think commercial enterprises should operate under amateur principles.
Who said that? You said it. I didn't.
Quote from: Haffrung;520580Surely there are reams and reams of amateur RPG material for you to enjoy, without getting your neck out of joint over what professionals choose to do in the commercial realm.
I don't. You're the one having a hissy fit over it right now, not I. ;)
Quote from: Benoist;520578Yeah, right. In your bizarro world maybe.
In the bizarro world of Merriam-Webster:
Professional -
participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs
Quote from: Haffrung;520587In the bizarro world of Merriam-Webster:
Professional - participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs
Reading comprehension is your friend. You should read some more Merriam-Webster, and pay closer attention to what the words actually say, not what you want to hear in your head.
Quote from: Benoist;520584That makes them all swords for hire.
Why do I get the impression you don't have meaningful employment, and resent those who do?
Quote from: Haffrung;520590Why do I get the impression you don't have meaningful employment, and resent those who do?
Because you're upset at what I just said and want to find a way to make me shut up, that's why. :)
Quote from: Benoist;520576No, it's no intrinsically wrong to do some work for money. Who said that?
It's the fact that you'd do ANY work for money that would make you a sellsword.
"Selling out" is the compromising of integrity, morality, or principles in exchange for money or "success" (however defined).
When you say "I'd write whatever, as long as you give me 6 cents a word," you technically are putting the paycheck before any considerations based on principle, integrity, what-have-you. As I said: if you don't have an ethical problem with that, then all's fine, as far as you're concerned.
Just wanted to point out that a mercenary or a sellsword is not the same as a sellout without getting into the rest of the argument. This started as a discussion of selling out and then became about what is a mercenary. (Never mind that while I wrote this there have been a couple of posts exchanged lighting a fire that I probably don't want to be involved in...)
I actually think the definition of a sellout in the quote above is fine. One does not meet that definition by being willing to write or do X for money. To be a sellout one must be shown to have compromised some principle.
So, for example, Lets assume that a person, RPGWriter, is on record as a proponent of rules light games, gets noticed writing such games, and then gets hired by a big game company to write their rules heavy game. Assuming that RPGWriter was such a proponent of rules light games that he believed, on principle, that rules heavy games are "bad".... RPGWriter could be labeled a sellout by her rules light loving fans.
(I decided to post what I had written anyway, and well... que sera, sera...)
Quote from: Ram;520593I actually think the definition of a sellout in the quote above is fine. One does not meet that definition by being willing to write or do X for money. To be a sellout one must be shown to have compromised some principle.
Ahhh that's a very good point! Very true! Did Graeme compromise some principle in order to take the paycheck from FFG? Only Graeme can answer that.
Quote from: Benoist;520592Because you're upset at what I just said and want to find a way to make me shut up, that's why. :)
Go back and read this thread; you've posted a pissy, ad-hominen retort to every post I made from the outset. What's your problem?
Honestly. I haven't posted here in months. Did I do something to annoy you some time in the past?
Quote from: Haffrung;520596Go back and read this thread; you've posted a pissy, ad-hominen retort to every post I made from the outset. What's your problem?
No problem on this side of the screen, mate.
Quote from: Haffrung;520596Honestly. I haven't posted here in months. Did I do something to annoy you some time in the past?
Not that I can recall, honestly.
Quote from: Benoist;520576When you say "I'd write whatever, as long as you give me 6 cents a word," you technically are putting the paycheck before any considerations based on principle, integrity, what-have-you. As I said: if you don't have an ethical problem with that, then all's fine, as far as you're concerned.
Market forces, my friend. At 6 cents/word, freelancers can rake in a tidy annual sum of $35-40K if they work consistently. Now that's a paycheque worth compromising one's principles for! :)
Quote from: Benoist;520576When you say "I'd write whatever, as long as you give me 6 cents a word," you technically are putting the paycheck before any considerations based on principle, integrity, what-have-you. As I said: if you don't have an ethical problem with that, then all's fine, as far as you're concerned.
because, of course, when he wrote/said that, he was ready to take a writing job for the aryan nation, etc. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Benoist;520594Ahhh that's a very good point! Very true! Did Graeme compromise some principle in order to take the paycheck from FFG? Only Graeme can answer that.
nice welcoming atmosphere you're making, dude. lighten up
I think there's a negative connotation to words like "mercenary" or "sellsword" that's being objected to. They're not as insulting as saying "sellout" and the implication that carries of compromising principles. But they do suggest the that (maybe? perhaps? possibly?) the "mercenary" individual may not have principles to compromise in the first place. Literally, mercenaries do harm for pay, with no real loyalty to anyone except the highest bidder. It's a pretty objectionable way to make a living and that sense is carried over when it's applied metaphorically. At the same time the words have enough ambiguity to allow the speaker to weasel out of those connotations if they are pointed out. You might get a similar reaction if you called someone an opportunist. Calling someone a professional doesn't carry any of those problems.
Quote from: Benoist;520598No problem on this side of the screen, mate.
Not that I can recall, honestly.
Doesn't this sort of passive-aggressive bullshit belong on RPG.Net?
Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;520600Market forces, my friend. At 6 cents/word, freelancers can rake in a tidy annual sum of $35-40K if they work consistently. Now that's a paycheque worth compromising one's principles for! :)
Is it?
Quote from: beeber;520602because, of course, when he wrote/said that, he was ready to take a writing job for the aryan nation, etc. :rolleyes:
nice welcoming atmosphere you're making, dude. lighten up
Well... I'm not the one making a Godwin here. I think
you guys should lighten up a little bit.
This thread is really going places.
(http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxjm4n4umw1rn1xxfo1_400.gif)
Quote from: Haffrung;520605Doesn't this sort of passive-aggressive bullshit belong on RPG.Net?
Actually, if it was passive-aggressive, sure. It would belong in RPGnet. Since what I posted there is 100% true, and really isn't hypocritical one way or the other, you can come to your own conclusion.
Quote from: two_fishes;520603I think there's a negative connotation to words like "mercenary" or "sellsword" that's being objected to. They're not as insulting as saying "sellout" and the implication that carries of compromising principles. But they do suggest the that (maybe? perhaps? possibly?) the "mercenary" individual may not have principles to compromise in the first place.
Yeah, that's actually the distinction between a mercenary or sellsword and a full-on sell-out. The mercenary doesn't have any particular principle to compromise when doing the job, as long as he gets the paycheck by the end of it, whereas the sell-out had some kind of principle he just neglected in favor of taking the paycheck.
Quote from: Benoist;520606Is it?
Possibly, depending on the local economy, alternative job qualifications, and one's degree of conviction in said principles.
I mean, I earn more in my day job without compromising any principles, but for some people "pursuing the dream" might be worth a paycut to work on games they don't actually play. Or maybe they have no other options besides McDonalds, or maybe their convictions on said topic are only mild i.e. not worth turning down a job over.
I just wanted to say thanks to Graeme for posting in this thread. I am a big fan of your work which has produce many hours of fun that has been integral in making WFRP one of my favourite RPGs of all time.
Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;520613Possibly, depending on the local economy, alternative job qualifications, and one's degree of conviction in said principles.
I mean, I earn more in my day job without compromising any principles, but for some people "pursuing the dream" might be worth a paycut to work on games they don't actually play. Or maybe they have no other options besides McDonalds, or maybe their convictions on said topic are only mild i.e. not worth turning down a job over.
It'll also depend on said personal principles and the type of extremes you are willing to go to uphold them, but that's a good answer nonetheless. Absolutely.
EDIT - you DID mention the degree of conviction in said principles. My mistake!
Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;520613Possibly, depending on the local economy, alternative job qualifications, and one's degree of conviction in said principles.
I mean, I earn more in my day job without compromising any principles, but for some people "pursuing the dream" might be worth a paycut to work on games they don't actually play. Or maybe they have no other options besides McDonalds, or maybe their convictions on said topic are only mild i.e. not worth turning down a job over.
And I'm guessing most people, even those who work in the industry, don't have
convictions over something as frivolous as RPGs. As crazy as it sounds to edition warriors, maybe Mr. Davis simply doesn't have any strong feelings whatsoever regarding game editions and mechanics, and regards them as interchangeable from his point of view. In fact, didn't he came out and explicitly say as much?
These aren't blood diamonds we're talking about. They're fucking games.
Thanks to Graeme for chiming in - I think the blog I had already linked to upthread, and I hope that indicates that he hasn't read too much of the drivel surfacing in the thread.
And thanks to Benoist for writing an immediate follow-up that was not only wonderfully off-topic but pretty much ensured that the post count of Mr Davies firmly remains at 1 for now.
Well done, Benoist! You've shown us once again that you really "don't give a fuck". Just after he said that he writes his stuff as edition-neutral as they come.
You're welcome WJ. And thank you to all the follow-up, angry posts that made sure we would go on for several pages from there.
Well done, guys! High fives!
Quote from: Haffrung;520617As crazy as it sounds to edition warriors, maybe Mr. Davis simply doesn't have any strong feelings whatsoever regarding game editions and mechanics, and regards them as interchangeable from his point of view. In fact, didn't he came out and explicitly say as much?
Yeah, if you're offered 6 cents/word as an RPG freelancer and that's your main gig, I think you'd write pretty much anything because the pay won't get better than that.
Quote from: Benoist;520619You're welcome WJ. And thank you to all the follow-up, angry posts that made sure we would go on for several pages from there.
Well done, guys! High fives!
just doing our jobs in upping post counts ;)
yeah, and i couldn't help but go straight to godwinning the thing, lol
Quote from: beeber;520621just doing our jobs in upping post counts ;)
yeah, and i couldn't help but go straight to godwinning the thing, lol
It's alright. I confirmed what Graeme himself said he pleaded guilty to, and then you guys came up with a barrage of comebacks in reaction to that. Another day on the RPG Site, I guess.
Quote from: GraemeDavis;520497If anyone wanted to pay me 6 cents a word or more to write 1e material, I'd happily do that as well.
Hmmm... *strokes beard*
Quote from: Dodger;520635Hmmm... *strokes beard*
I think you would need the rights too :)
A kickstarter for Graeme to rewrite the last two parts of TEW is tempting but suffers this fatal flaw.
Quote from: Skywalker;520636I think you would need the rights too :)
A kickstarter for Graeme to rewrite the last two parts of TEW is tempting but suffers this fatal flaw.
Not if the product itself was free. :)
Quote from: Windjammer;520618Thanks to Graeme for chiming in - I think the blog I had already linked to upthread, and I hope that indicates that he hasn't read too much of the drivel surfacing in the thread.
And thanks to Benoist for writing an immediate follow-up that was not only wonderfully off-topic but pretty much ensured that the post count of Mr Davies firmly remains at 1 for now.
Well done, Benoist! You've shown us once again that you really "don't give a fuck". Just after he said that he writes his stuff as edition-neutral as they come.
I sometimes wonder what people are having for breakfast.
Some of the unrestrained hostility around these parts in recent weeks is mind-boggling.
not enough fiber
back OT, i hope someone reviews it. a late 2012 means that it'll probably drop off my radar between now and then.
Quote from: One Horse Town;520639I sometimes wonder what people are having for breakfast.
Some of the unrestrained hostility around these parts in recent weeks is mind-boggling.
Damn you, can't a man have a biscuit?
I mean, an occasional bout of aggression? ;)
Quote from: Windjammer;520618And thanks to Benoist for writing an immediate follow-up that was not only wonderfully off-topic but pretty much ensured that the post count of Mr Davies firmly remains at 1 for now.
Benoist has been detrimental to this thread and theRPGSite in general for some time now. He's been clogging up most threads with nonsense.
It's unfortunate that further discussions cannot be had with Mr. Davies, due to the inability of some to state their case and move on.
To the RPG Site in general? Well, thank you, I guess.
Quote from: Benoist;520576"Selling out" is the compromising of integrity, morality, or principles in exchange for money or "success" (however defined).
Frankly, I can't see how writing an RPG book may be related to morality or principles, as long as you are trying to do a good job.
The concept of "sellout" is one that has always baffled me, because I don't understand the position of those who use it. I think that is a false moral high ground, because usually the alleged sellouts are honest abou their job. You may like it or not, but they are not being unprofessional or deceiving.
An RPG writer has no moral principles at stake when writing a product: he has an assignment, which has to be done on deadline and in certain conditions. As long as he does it, his behavior is ethical. Now you, as user of the product, are free to like it or not, to find it useful or useless. But as long as the contents of the product match what is advertised, no moral principles are compromised.
Seriously, assigning an ethic value to the writing of an RPG campaign seems preposterous to me.
And Mr. Davis, thank you for showing up and thank you for your work, that I have enjoyed enormously.
To tell the truth, folks, as much as I dislike the new WFRP, this thread has been just bad form all around. We can do better. This should be a site about discussion, not non-communication.
I hope the new Enemy Within has an adventure like the Death on the Reik. I think all good campaigns need a section where the players can freewheel and explore the setting a bit. And I prefer that material to adventures where the players have to identify, investigate, and keep track of 20+ NPCs.
For those who have no interest in 3e, how easy would it be to "covert" back to 2e? I get the impression they're vastly different, but it might be fun to revisit the same kind of adventure as the original TEW.
probably not too tough to convert back, considering graeme said on that blog entry--
"While writing for this new Enemy Within campaign, I took particular care to ensure that the adventures would be easy for an experienced GM to adapt to the first or second edition rules. My intention was that it should work well as a WFRP adventure, period, whichever edition of the rules a particular gaming group prefers."
makes it likely i'll pick it up, provided it's not too expensive
Quote from: MonkeyWrench;520787For those who have no interest in 3e, how easy would it be to "covert" back to 2e? I get the impression they're vastly different, but it might be fun to revisit the same kind of adventure as the original TEW.
I tried converting back one of the first WFRP3 adventures that came out, and it seemed to me that once you had ripped out all the cards, tokens, weird new sheets and whatnot, you had really also gutted out the a lot of the scenario and were looking around to make stuff from whole cloth to replace it.
i.e. its doable, but imho not worth the time and effort. Of course later adventures may be better to convert, but the cost proscribes me buying them to experiment.
@beeber, I sort of feel the same way regarding the price.
@jadrax, I'm not looking for a 1-1 conversion, just a general feel. I suppose my real question is w/o the main rulebooks how easy is it to get a sense of the relative power level of challenges, npcs, etc. I'd mostly be picking up TEW2 for the scenario itself. It does seem like it'd be a lot of work to convert though.
Yeah, now if its actually being written with backwards compatibility in mind, that kind of makes it half tempting.
Edit: It's annoying actually: given the lack of space wfrp2 mechanics would have took up, they could probably made it duel stat pretty fucking easily which would have moved it from half-tempting to automatic buy.
Quote from: Benoist;520534Welcome, Graeme! :)
Well sure, you are a sell-out: what you describe is basically mercenary work. "As long as you guys are paying me 6 cents a word, I'll write for you." You seem to have a very good reason to do so (i.e. paying the bills, feed the family), but yeah, that does make you a mercenary, a sellsword. So long as you don't have a problem with people recognizing that fact, it's all good, I guess.
I suspect that there are a number of "unless..." conditions to that sentence, but if you expect him to clarify every single fucking piece of every sentence he writes to prevent you leaping to a false conclusion, well, you'd better be paying six cents a word.
Quote from: jadrax;520791I tried converting back one of the first WFRP3 adventures that came out, and it seemed to me that once you had ripped out all the cards, tokens, weird new sheets and whatnot, you had really also gutted out the a lot of the scenario and were looking around to make stuff from whole cloth to replace it.
i.e. its doable, but imho not worth the time and effort. Of course later adventures may be better to convert, but the cost proscribes me buying them to experiment.
It really depends which adventures you're talking about. Early stufff like in the main box or the free "A Day Late, a Shilling Short" was specifically geared towards introducing you to the components bit by bit. The adventures included in the expansion boxes for the 4 Chaos Gods are similarly themed around introducing the new subsystems to you. It's a mixture of programmed instruction and module - learning by playing.
It's only the stand-alone adventures like Gathering Storm or Edge of Night that were more modules in their own right. Did you try to convert one of these?
Quote from: Windjammer;520848It really depends which adventures you're talking about. Early stufff like in the main box or the free "A Day Late, a Shilling Short" was specifically geared towards introducing you to the components bit by bit. The adventures included in the expansion boxes for the 4 Chaos Gods are similarly themed around introducing the new subsystems to you. It's a mixture of programmed instruction and module - learning by playing.
It's only the stand-alone adventures like Gathering Storm or Edge of Night that were more modules in their own right. Did you try to convert one of these?
It was Gathering Storm, fortunately I managed to off-load it second hand. It just seemed to be a string of encounters linked together with no real coherent plot. I also had a look at a copy of the scenario in the Magic set, which looked equally lacklustre. When its got WFRP written on the front, I really expect better.
Bah, remakes are almost always worse than the original.
RPGPundit