Winds of Chaos

I'm with macd21 on this one. Having it there just to modify or ignore is a waste of word count IMHO.

You also have the opposite issue to what someone said earlier. Some GM's see a date and have a hard time altering it. Played in a D&D Forgotten Realms game a couple decades back where the GM "couldn't" run a few of the adventures because they either "already happened" or "hadn't happened yet". He knew, conceptually, that it was his world and it was up to him but wasn't willing to play around with the timeline much. He wanted to keep things as closer to published as possible to make the use of future products "easier". YMMV.

Personally, I could take it out leave it. Maybe, if they advance the overall calendar several years during the run of the game, an updated timeline with it's "canonical" happening I could see, but other that that....*shrug*

Just my two pence.

Hi, for me the difference is that it is simpler to ignore a given date instead of deducting it from the dates that are given in the handouts.

I understand Jareth's point when you take into account an inflexible GM.

It's no big thing though. Anyone who wants to know the date that is implicitly defined by the handouts, will find it easily with his favourite search engine. It will likely guide to this thread. I went through the very same thing when I wanted to know (just for a friend;)), when the D&D tyranny of dragons starts.

Whatever your approach on exact dates, it's only fair that the adventure should communicate clearly to the reader/GM what is and isn't important.

In Shadows, for instance, IIRC the only important date is the start of the Schaffenfest, which the PCs will learn about from a printed flyer. If the GM wants to use the handouts as is, then s/he needs to time the prologue so the PCs can get to Bogenhafen in time but preferably not too far ahead.

Then again, if the GM is going to do their own handouts anyway (for example, as in my case, if they play in a different language), then the point is moot - but the adventure should still make it clear that "the festival should start about (say) 7-9 days after the PCs hear about it in Altdorf".

I finally acquired and started reading the PDF. So far I got to the Weissbrück episode.

The whole thing so far is full of promises for the next books, especially the horned rat and empire in ruins. Nothing to substantial, but it raises high expectations. I really hope that C7 will fulfill that.

I like the added explanations, makes it a nice read.

Like others wrote, I also miss the map of the coach incident.

There is one iconic thing that is missing: art of the silly contact gestures in Altdorf. I was looking forward to the way that would look in the WFRP 4 style. Now I'm a little disappointed. Luckily I have the original.

Zisse wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:39 pm

There is one iconic thing that is missing: art of the silly contact gestures in Altdorf. I was looking forward to the way that would look in the WFRP 4 style. Now I'm a little disappointed. Luckily I have the original.

That art originally appears in Death on the Reik. Presumably we'll see some recreations of it in the new DotR.

I should have checked this before I posted. Thank you for keeping the fire of hope alight.

Zisse wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:39 am

I should have checked this before I posted. Thank you for keeping the fire of hope alight.

Theo is, of course, right - but the signals are inspired by a famous photo of Aleister Crowley (possibly via Dean Stockwell's turn in the film of The Dunwich Horror) so if you're looking for inspiration...

DocShoveller wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:02 am

Zisse wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:39 am

I should have checked this before I posted. Thank you for keeping the fire of hope alight.

Theo is, of course, right - but the signals are inspired by a famous photo of Aleister Crowley (possibly via Dean Stockwell's turn in the film of The Dunwich Horror) so if you're looking for inspiration...

This I did not know. Got any links or images?

Could it be this one?
https://images.app.goo.gl/Qge3wrVoX4KcknZ39

Arnizipal wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:13 am

Could it be this one?
https://images.app.goo.gl/Qge3wrVoX4KcknZ39

Yeah, I really think the bloke on p.6 looks like Crowley (and since a lot of WFRP 1e is done from photo reference...).