WFRP and D&D

All the Cubicle 7 news
CapnZapp
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:13 pm

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by CapnZapp » Sun Apr 01, 2018 12:21 pm

EvilSpaceOrc wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 9:18 pm
I don't like the suggestions from the OP.

Movement: In a game like DnD when characters are super heroic and easily overpower anything that's not a dragon moving a lot fits the system and the fantasy. In Warhammer combat should involve making more careful decisions, and deciding on movement or staying engaged in combat fits it better. You are not supposed to stab one goblin in the face, jump across the field and happily decapitate another.
Why do you equate movement to super heroics :?

Instead movement makes for a much more realistic-feeling combat.

Even if you keep WFRP characters mostly missing, allowing them to move about on the battlefield would be a huge improvement all by itself compared to 2E.

Essentially: while you have Attacks 1, 2E combat works decently: you do your attack but you get one half action more, what do you want to do?

Once you have Attacks 2, it all falls apart, because any other action than two attacks is a losing proposition.

What I suggest is making movement free. That doesn't mean you should be able to leave combat for free.

User avatar
EvilSpaceOrc
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:10 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by EvilSpaceOrc » Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:01 pm

CapnZapp wrote:
Sun Apr 01, 2018 12:21 pm
Why do you equate movement to super heroics :?
That's a bit of a generalisation here :P

I'd imagine that when you're in combat you'd have to pay a lot of attention to you opponents and it would be common to get stuck with limited movement options.

Number of attacks does not equal the amount of literal swings you can take, but rather your skill in finding an opening to take a swing or a stab that will actually connect. And if you want to go all in you'd have to dedicate more time to get an advantage in combat - that's why swift attack is listed as a separate action.

You want to move somewhere? Fine, but now you have to split your attention between blocking, attacking and trying to would the opponent, and you won't give your 100% to either of those actions.

No one stops you from giving up on your extra attacks and move instead, it's a great way of adding meaningful choice in combat.

No:12
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:35 pm

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by No:12 » Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:31 pm

CapnZapp wrote:
Sun Apr 01, 2018 12:21 pm
EvilSpaceOrc wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 9:18 pm
I don't like the suggestions from the OP.

Movement: In a game like DnD when characters are super heroic and easily overpower anything that's not a dragon moving a lot fits the system and the fantasy. In Warhammer combat should involve making more careful decisions, and deciding on movement or staying engaged in combat fits it better. You are not supposed to stab one goblin in the face, jump across the field and happily decapitate another.
Why do you equate movement to super heroics :?

Instead movement makes for a much more realistic-feeling combat.

Even if you keep WFRP characters mostly missing, allowing them to move about on the battlefield would be a huge improvement all by itself compared to 2E.

Essentially: while you have Attacks 1, 2E combat works decently: you do your attack but you get one half action more, what do you want to do?

Once you have Attacks 2, it all falls apart, because any other action than two attacks is a losing proposition.

What I suggest is making movement free. That doesn't mean you should be able to leave combat for free.
This I completely second. As I posted earlier, I'd like to see the attacks options include a better variety than "get a +1A and use swift attacks". Keep the possibility of better combatants doing more hits/dam etc, but not at the cost of variables like choosing to aim, move, feint, cautiously attack from behind a shield/dwarf/etc. Just apply modifiers to the hit roll.
I really like the idea of getting extra move/action/whatever at the cost of getting tired. But the getting tired bit should have a consequence on performance. 3rd ed and Star Wars are IMHO too lenient.

I'm probably being too picky though.

CapnZapp
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:13 pm

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by CapnZapp » Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:15 pm

EvilSpaceOrc wrote:
Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:01 pm
No one stops you from giving up on your extra attacks and move instead, it's a great way of adding meaningful choice in combat.
And I'm saying this is exactly where 2nd ed went wrong! :)

It simply isn't a good design to make people choose between movement and being effective - it encourages people to stand still and be static and focus on killing monsters.

Instead do it like D&D 4 & 5 - give out basic movement for free! :)

(If you don't want to move, fine. But you can't use your movement for anything else, so you might as well use it!)

This creates dynamic battlefields where combat feels much more "real" and where you get to engage with the battleground; grabbing ropes and chandeliers, jumping over barrels, overturning tables, pushing back the foes, being staggered down the steps of a staircase...

Free movement is fun - you should try it sometime! :)

User avatar
EvilSpaceOrc
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:10 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by EvilSpaceOrc » Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:49 pm

You wondered how making a trade off between attacks and mobility equals superheroism, later suggesting
grabbing ropes and chandeliers, jumping over barrels, overturning tables
for free.

Actually, I remembered there was an optional rule in 2ed rulebook to add another half-action per turn, you might as well do that and have both movement and swift attack at the same time, and no rules have to be changed.

Orin J.
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:31 am

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by Orin J. » Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:43 pm

I feel like this "full attack when moving" demand ignores the simple fact that the GM will get it too. I always used multiple attacks as encouragement for the heroes to avoid getting into a mindless slugfest- after all, i can give the enemies more attacks far more easily than the adventurers can train them themselves. doing it otherwise is just removing a a major advantage to tactical playing, since in a choice between doing raw damage and trying to simply weather the enemy blows to get something done, players will always figure they can do the roleplaying after they finish the hacking.

the other option is simply holding back on the kind of enemies the players face to keep them safe, and that's not fun or in the spirit of warhammer!

Gebhardt
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 5:06 pm

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by Gebhardt » Tue Apr 03, 2018 5:47 pm

CapnZapp wrote:
Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:15 pm
EvilSpaceOrc wrote:
Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:01 pm
No one stops you from giving up on your extra attacks and move instead, it's a great way of adding meaningful choice in combat.
And I'm saying this is exactly where 2nd ed went wrong! :)

It simply isn't a good design to make people choose between movement and being effective - it encourages people to stand still and be static and focus on killing monsters.

Instead do it like D&D 4 & 5 - give out basic movement for free! :)

(If you don't want to move, fine. But you can't use your movement for anything else, so you might as well use it!)

This creates dynamic battlefields where combat feels much more "real" and where you get to engage with the battleground; grabbing ropes and chandeliers, jumping over barrels, overturning tables, pushing back the foes, being staggered down the steps of a staircase...

Free movement is fun - you should try it sometime! :)
First time poster, long time player of Warhammer. Let me start by saying one of the last things I ever want to hear said about Warhammer is let's make it more like D&D. Now before I enrage all hardcore D&D fans let me say I grew up on 1st edition D&D. My older brother introduced me to the game and I in turn introduced it to countless others. I was a huge fan. That changed one night in my friends basement with one line, "Hey guys, I just picked up this new game I would like to try." One session and I was a convert. I was enthralled with Warhammers dark and gritty feel as well as the simplistic nature of the "heroes". This coupled with a system that strayed from the level mechanic and with talents and skills galore, many of which had no combat application at all. To me this is where rollplaying evolved into roleplaying.

Ok nostalgia aside let me get to the point. CapnZapp states that free movement makes things more fun. In short, I agree. I thoroughly enjoyed it when playing games like 7th Sea, where swinging from chandeliers or riding down sails on a knife are, well dramatic. Do I feel sort of drama feel's 'right' in Warhammer. Not really. I don't ever want Warhammer fights to be fun in the sense of swashbuckling. I always want that nagging feeling of, was this a wise decision to start this fight? Should I cut and run? If that next blow connects this could be really bad. Secondly CapnZapp suggests that free movement is more 'real'. On this point we disagree. When I think of all the fights I have watched in the real world, I can count on zero hands how many involved swinging in from a light fixture of some sort. I think in this sense 'real' is mistakenly confused with dramatic.

Now this all being said I understand the license has changed over the years, you only have to take Emperor Karl Franz as a shining example, in first edition Warhammer he was listed as an ineffectual ruler whose empire was rotting from within to second edition where he is a griffon riding war hero. So I understand things have gone from low fantasy to high fantasy in order to sell more mini's for table top. (I can only imagine a slumped over emperor on a throne mini would not do well for sales). I also acknowledge that game design has come along way and I for one like some of the changes. But my concern is that many of these changes are for the sake of ease and not necessarily in the best interest of the setting.

To make a long post longer, I don't want my Warhammer to be more like D&D. I want my Warhammer to be more like Warhammer, where nothing is free, everything has a price and if the most you pay is some movement then count yourself lucky.

ArnaudBelard
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 10:34 pm

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by ArnaudBelard » Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:40 pm

I don't want my Warhammer to be more like D&D.

Hear! Hear!

Trippy
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 12:55 am

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by Trippy » Mon Apr 09, 2018 4:46 am

With regards to 1st edition WFRP, actions in combat largely amounted to move or attack, with charging into combat being the go between. D&D mechanics encourage the idea that you can move into and out of combat with various mechanics associated with this (including opportunities of attack). I agree that WFRP should feel more dangerous and less cinematic than D&D, but in all honesty this mechanical aspect is such a minor part of the overall appeal of WFRP that I'm struggling against the boredom of even addressing it now.

If people feel better that the combat system has been adjusted thus then sobeit. I'm not sure people like me would even notice it!

User avatar
EvilSpaceOrc
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:10 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: WFRP and D&D

Post by EvilSpaceOrc » Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:43 am

Trippy wrote:
Mon Apr 09, 2018 4:46 am
I'm not sure people like me would even notice it!
And that's another point where I would disagree. If you look at The One Ring rules you should be able to see how they enhance the type of the game and how closely entwined the rules and the narrative are. DnD rules always sway the game towards superheroism, and combat is somewhat predictable, emboldening players. WH 2ed or TOR have rules that can make every single encounter potentially deadly.

It is just to illustrate that rules have an influence on how you perceive the game word. Free movement indicates freedom and power, trade off between actions and movement indicates your limitations.

My bet is WH 4ed will have similar rules to 2ed, Age of Sigmar will be a crossover with DnD.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest