Page 1 of 1

Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:28 am
by Gman
Hello all, there is a lot to love about 4e. just to put things in perspective I have a fair amount of experience with 4e so far. I have gone through played 21 sessions as a player. A gm ran Dying of the light 1st ed by converting it to 4e on the fly with mixed results.

As a gm I have ran Making the rounds 6 sessions.

Rough night at the 3 feathers, 2 sessions.
Day at the trials. 2 sessions.

Combined 32 sessions with the newest edition of wfrp 4e.


Problem is the more I experience 4e the more I dislike advantage. Again, there is a lot to love about the new edition but I dislike Advantage A LOT.

With that said It appears to be deeply ingrained into the core game. Monsters use it to activate their their special attacks, many talent are dependent on it. Disengagement is based off of advantage. I'm sure their is more that I'm forgetting.

1) With all of that said has anyone tried running the game without advantage? How did it work? What did you do to make it work?

2) Does anyone know if their will be official rules on how to remove advantage as an optional rule?


Really looking forward to TEW Directors Cut


Thanks all
G

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2020 2:49 pm
by CommanderCax
Hi Gman,

1) I haven't tried without Advantages, but we started right from the beginning with the Optional Rule, that you can't have more Advantages than your Initiative characteristic. It works quite OK, though strictly speaking that way a Troll could never get enough Advantages to use the Vomit trait.
Currently I am playing with the idea of giving just +10 bonus for having more Advantages than the opponent irrespective of the amount of Advantages per se and/or not being able to build up more than one Advantage per Round. Not sure of the consequences on the meta though...

2) Don't know, though don't expect it either. Especially regarding the slow progress C7 is making with anything WFRP related...

Cheers
CC

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2020 3:40 pm
by CapnZapp
Gman wrote:
Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:28 am
I dislike Advantage A LOT
If you read this forum you will realize you are far from alone...

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2020 4:01 pm
by Gman
Thanks for the reply. We started limiting advantage to 6 after our 2nd session so about 30 sessions ago. It's not so much the math that bothers us it's the tedium of tracking all of the advantage for each pc/npc. spending it, gaining it, losing it etc. Honestly it kind of reminds me of all of the counters used in 3e. 3e had some fantastic ideas but there was a tipping point that it all just became to tedious.....advantage kinda feels like that but baked nto the core system instead of presented as optional bolt on rules like those found in Signs of Faith, Lure of Power, Winds of Change etc.

Thanks again for the reply. I'll keep my fingers crossed for published option rules. :)

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:28 am
by easl
Gman wrote:
Sun Mar 15, 2020 4:01 pm
Thanks again for the reply. I'll keep my fingers crossed for published option rules. :)
Page 164 has a call-out box "Options: Limiting Advantage". They recommend a limit of either 2 or Init Bonus. Either would be more limited than the 'max 6' you decided to house rule, so if you're happy with your current system I would say don't change it just to comply with the call-out box. But if your group really wants to follow a set of *official* "published option rules", those are official, published, and optional :)

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:23 am
by CapnZapp
easl wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:28 am
Page 164 has a call-out box "Options: Limiting Advantage". They recommend a limit of either 2 or Init Bonus. Either would be more limited than the 'max 6' you decided to house rule, so if you're happy with your current system I would say don't change it just to comply with the call-out box. But if your group really wants to follow a set of *official* "published option rules", those are official, published, and optional :)
The problem is multi-layered.

1) Advantage is too powerful, changing players' tactics to metagame advantage accrual.
"What is the optimal game piece move here?" as opposed to "What would my character do?"

2) Advantage is also incredibly fiddly, adding a counter to each and every creature, that is constantly changing for most if not all actions taken

If you decide to remove the mechanism, you will realize it is built into the system in several unconnected areas, such as Talents. This makes it incredibly hard to do way with in a satisfying way.

And if you only limit advantage, you only mitigate 1 but not 2.

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:27 am
by CapnZapp
The hard cold truth is that 4E is a trainwreck of a system, designed by people that utterly lost track of the bigger picture. It is 2E, except every conceivable subsystem have been made more complicated, broken and cluttery. After playing it extensively I have concluded that there exists no simple fixes. The only permanent solution is to use a different ruleset.

YMMV, of course, but I have a really hard time believing how anyone could actively embrace what 4E offers.

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 8:18 am
by Orin J.
CapnZapp wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:27 am
The hard cold truth is that 4E is a trainwreck of a system, designed by people that utterly lost track of the bigger picture. It is 2E, except every conceivable subsystem have been made more complicated, broken and cluttery. After playing it extensively I have concluded that there exists no simple fixes. The only permanent solution is to use a different ruleset.

YMMV, of course, but I have a really hard time believing how anyone could actively embrace what 4E offers.
Seems to work well enough for people with significant house-ruling in place already who view the rules as a guideline second to their own antics.

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 10:12 am
by Gman
easl wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:28 am
Gman wrote:
Sun Mar 15, 2020 4:01 pm
Thanks again for the reply. I'll keep my fingers crossed for published option rules. :)
Page 164 has a call-out box "Options: Limiting Advantage". They recommend a limit of either 2 or Init Bonus. Either would be more limited than the 'max 6' you decided to house rule, so if you're happy with your current system I would say don't change it just to comply with the call-out box. But if your group really wants to follow a set of *official* "published option rules", those are official, published, and optional :)


Thanks for the reply :) While we may limit advantage to lower than 6, I hesitate to continue to limit it as we already see monsters that need a min of 3 to use their special attacks. I'm concerned that bigger monsters like greater demons may need more than 3 to use their special attacks.

I guess I'm hoping for a published optional rule to just remove advantage because that would in theory provide balanced ways to still allow special attacks and the use of advantage dependent talents.

Ultimately I'm just trying to make the best of it but am very concerned that I am going to have a repeat of 3rd ed. 3e had many of my favorite published adventures but the mechanics just eventually crumbled under their own weight.


I'll keep my fingers crossed for now. :)

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:05 am
by Jareth Valar
CapnZapp wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:27 am
The hard cold truth is that 4E is a trainwreck of a system, designed by people that utterly lost track of the bigger picture. It is 2E, except every conceivable subsystem have been made more complicated, broken and cluttery. After playing it extensively I have concluded that there exists no simple fixes. The only permanent solution is to use a different ruleset.

YMMV, of course, but I have a really hard time believing how anyone could actively embrace what 4E offers.
I would like to thank you for adding that last paragraph.

Your opinions are well voiced, but not necessarily shared by all. I just wanted to say I appreciate that understanding.

I don't want fluffy discussion, but just the basics understanding that "ymmv".

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:18 am
by totsuzenheni
I write this suggestion without having much experience of the fourth edition, other than reading it, but would it be possible to change Advantage based prerequisites and triggers into Success Level based prerequisites and triggers?

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:57 pm
by Orin J.
totsuzenheni wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:18 am
I write this suggestion without having much experience of the fourth edition, other than reading it, but would it be possible to change Advantage based prerequisites and triggers into Success Level based prerequisites and triggers?
there's several monster abilities and a couple feats that either spend advantage or generate banked advantage after the roll, so you're effectively rewriting a fair amount of stuff from scratch.

of course, i think the main issue with trying to fix 4th is it's so interwoven that fixing any problem will require entirely rewriting several things.....

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2020 2:38 am
by Arnizipal
I've been thinking of hourseruling Advantage as well.
My current idea leaves the rules mostly as they are, except that your Advantage doesn't automatically increase the Damage you do.
You can add you Advantage to your Damage after you hit but then you lose all of it (just like most big creatures when activating their special attacks).

This way Advantage helps you hit, but doesn't make you a killing machine (except potentially for one attack every so many rounds).

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2020 7:49 am
by Hyarion
One simple houserule I want to test with my group is to keep Advantage working like it currently does, but in order to use it you have to spend it, so that you can no longer just accumulate it and use it passively.

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2020 6:09 pm
by Chuck
Hyarion wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 7:49 am
One simple houserule I want to test with my group is to keep Advantage working like it currently does, but in order to use it you have to spend it, so that you can no longer just accumulate it and use it passively.
I really like this idea. Keep us posted on how it goes.

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2020 5:23 am
by CapnZapp
Orin J. wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 8:18 am
Seems to work well enough for people with significant house-ruling in place already who view the rules as a guideline second to their own antics.
Well, that's an awfully low bar to set for yourself as a rules designer...

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2020 5:35 am
by CapnZapp
Jareth Valar wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:05 am
I would like to thank you for adding that last paragraph.

Your opinions are well voiced, but not necessarily shared by all. I just wanted to say I appreciate that understanding.

I don't want fluffy discussion, but just the basics understanding that "ymmv".
You're welcome.

It's especially hard since Warhammer is perhaps my #1 most loved setting.

Even if we discount the obviously broken mechanics, there are still a number of annoying recalibrations that change how the world works in profoundly unwelcomed ways.

I'm thinking of how 4E expectations on money simply aren't compatible with previous edition treasure and loot. (There's zero discussion of how to reconcile a Beggar's Bronze 1 rating with the likelyhood his party will gain scores of gold coins after successful adventures)

I'm thinking of how 4E makes armor mandatory, a significant change to how 1E and 2E worked. Character concepts where you adventure unarmored have been brutally invalidated, a step towards Gotrek & Felix level adventuring I personally resent. Especially since I'm not even convinced the change was conscious and intentional...

I'm thinking of how clumsily and stupidly Bleeding was implemented, again more or less invalidating any group of travellers without a trained healer among them.

Wizards are unplayably weak at first, and unstoppably powerful later on. (=The way overcasting rules lead to exponential power was a bad idea poorly implemented)

And of course, the wholly inept Bestiary that utterly fails to provide guidance to what the relative power levels between creatures are meant to be. Any group of experienced characters will simply trounce most of the entire Bestiary, simply because the way opposed Weapon Skill tests work now.

In short, you simply cannot have a monster with a WS in the 30s or 40s. Against my heroes even NPC fighters with skill scores of 80% or 100% are cut down like wheat, simply because the rules let them. And that's after limiting Advantage to +20%!

(The bonuses for shooting at point blank and for outnumbering your foes utterly break 4E combat once the players understand the system, despite looking reasonable from a 2E perspective. Yes, I'm asserting the 4E rules are written by people that doesn't understand how the 4E system works profoundly differently than 2E! I'm using the word "amateurs" after all, and you can trust I didn't arrive at that denotation lightly)

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:05 am
by adambeyoncelowe
I, too, have considered how to remove Advantage or at least lessen its impact. We've not yet put it into practice, though, as we've tweaked the way we run combat instead and it's finally working as it's supposed to.

That said, there's still a lot of fiddliness with multiple modifiers (range, size, terrain, Talents, Advantage). A rule to simplify modifiers across the board would be really helpful.

But it did occur to me that an easy hack for Advantage would be to limit Advantage to rolls where you succeed by 3+ SLs (net) or where you inflict more than minimum damage (i.e., 2+).

Opposed rolls where you win but don't win spectacularly would simply allow you to retain the Advantage you already have.

In all cases, you'd limit Advantage to 3. Monsters would halve the costs of any special attacks that use Advantage to make them work.

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:18 am
by adambeyoncelowe
I've just read this Word of God post (indirectly from Andy Law): https://www.reddit.com/r/warhammerfanta ... nt/feuple5

Basically, if you want advantage to work, it's supposed to be used with fast SLs. That way, advantage doesn't increase damage, only chance of hitting, and you'll never have more than +9SLs from your roll.

We're going to try this next. It seems sensible. It also means we won't need to cap advantage, which is good, because we've noticed how quickly it vanishes after varying our fights a bit more.

Re: Removing advantage from the game?

Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:30 pm
by SigmariteOrWrong
Hyarion wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 7:49 am
One simple houserule I want to test with my group is to keep Advantage working like it currently does, but in order to use it you have to spend it, so that you can no longer just accumulate it and use it passively.
Absolutely something we were going to try to implement at the table. Made a lot of sense to us.
adambeyoncelowe wrote:
Sat Apr 04, 2020 5:18 am
I've just read this Word of God post (indirectly from Andy Law): https://www.reddit.com/r/warhammerfanta ... nt/feuple5

Basically, if you want advantage to work, it's supposed to be used with fast SLs. That way, advantage doesn't increase damage, only chance of hitting, and you'll never have more than +9SLs from your roll.

We're going to try this next. It seems sensible. It also means we won't need to cap advantage, which is good, because we've noticed how quickly it vanishes after varying our fights a bit more.
That's what we use. We've been playing any bonus, Advantage or otherwise, which results in a success where there would have been failure results in an +0SL Success. I think it's initially mentioned under ranged combat, but we apply it everywhere. It makes those talents that give +1SL much more valuable to PC's too, and much more likely for PC's to double up on Talents early on.

I think combining these two rules would result in lots of great messy bloody conflicts, and that's what my WFRP is all about, especially with 10% of combat exchanges resulting in a CRIT or FUMB.