Official WFRP FAQ

Cubicle 7 // 2018
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:16 pm

yeah it's miles better to have armor than a shield, especially if you aren't using simplified armor
mormegil
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:48 am

Sun Jun 30, 2019 3:18 am

Shields just need more effort to become even more effective.
macd21
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:28 am

Sun Jun 30, 2019 3:21 am

CapnZapp wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 3:05 pm
Of course crit negation is your first priority.

That said, a -20 penalty can halve your chance at succeeding on the Test. And the best chance of avoiding death and defeat is to win your Tests. Throwing that away just because there's a 10% risk of a critical in the RAW is and feels very dodgy indeed.

But let's not focus overly on what amounts to a corner case "no armour but still a shield". All that accomplishes is drawing off our attention from the actual issues with the RAW.
Oh if you have armour, then yeah you just use the shield for the +1 Defensive bonus, unless you've invested in it (Shieldsman talent, Ambidextrous, Parry skill). But the only issues I see with the RAW are the presentation (having to parse the rules from multiple chapters, without a clear explanation).
CapnZapp
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:15 am
Location: Norsca

Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:20 am

Saying "presentation" is the "only" issue is the understatement of the day. The plain and simple truth is that the rules for shields in WFRP4 are among the worst I have ever seen in any ttrpg ever: not only is the "presentation" completely cocked up, the rules are entirely unintuitive, actually rather complicated and suffers from not one but several levels of hasty and ill-advised patchwork. None of which is needed for such a simple concept...

In short, they don't work (not in any practical sense they don't). Verdict: only a complete redesign can save them.

In the meanwhile, I encourage everyone to question using them or even trying to. Why even bother when you can get (back) to a perfectly serviceable set of shield rules by mostly just taking away everything C7 has come up with?

I know this advice is sound because I have done exactly that and then playtested the vastly simpler and faster result for six months.
mormegil
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:48 am

Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:20 am

One year and still people are crying about shields. I suggest to make a disclaimer noting all the things that each members abhors in 4th and how they individually fixed them. Thus, any new member can find solutions for his own problems.

And hopefully we can move on.
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

Wed Jul 03, 2019 9:46 am

mormegil wrote:
Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:20 am
One year and still people are crying about shields. I suggest to make a disclaimer noting all the things that each members abhors in 4th and how they individually fixed them. Thus, any new member can find solutions for his own problems.

And hopefully we can move on.
with the rules as written being what could be politely described as "confusing and overworked", i don't think there's any probalem in trying to fix them, and most new players will probably benefit from an ongoing discussion more than having previous answers pinned (since i've found a lot of new players just straight won't read pinned threads)

not to mention i'm not sure what you mean by "move on"- this is an RPG forum, nitpicking over the same issues for decades comes with the experience! :P
User avatar
Danke Dave
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:19 pm
Location: Canadia

Wed Jul 03, 2019 11:13 am

mormegil wrote:
Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:20 am
One year and still people are crying about shields. I suggest to make a disclaimer noting all the things that each members abhors in 4th and how they individually fixed them. Thus, any new member can find solutions for his own problems.

And hopefully we can move on.
Then the forum would die :P
Post Reply