Combat example

Cubicle 7 // 2018
CapnZapp
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:15 am
Location: Norsca

Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:41 am

I would have loved to discuss WFRP4 in a frank unrestrained manner over at the main rpg forum on the net, but I have found that they're only interested in feel-good discussions and success stories, and that I would have only gotten myself a thread-ban (or worse) if I had called out WFRP4 as the steaming turd (though with a couple of yummy chunks* in there) it is.

It really is a near-complete failure as a game. All they had to do was fix and update 2E*, but after a good start in theory (with making Tests opposed), then they indiscriminately added in truckloads of stuff without testing each subsystem against each other. Like how the core idea to have unrestricted advantage accumulation simply doesn't work. Like how bonuses rack up without meaningful restrictions, utterly wrecking the active vs passive balance. The game is a nightmare of clutter: you easily end up with three or four modifiers to every roll. And the various subsystems add far too many rolls! (special hits, critical hits, condition rolls, armor rolls...) Monster stats are a catastrophic failure. And that's even before we go into nuances, like the way wizards are nerfed into oblivion, the way armor has been upgraded into a must-have and how critical hits are full of cluttery details but can't kill you while bleeding always does.

The only way I make sense of it is by assuming the devs simply don't run the game as written.

*) https://www.windsofchaos.com/forum/view ... ?f=5&t=216
**) The art direction seems to be moderately appreciated, and I acknowledge my players loved the careers system more than I did

Anyway, I would have loved for "WFRP4 is a trainwreck" to have become common knowledge, and not let C7 get away with a game that fails on so many fronts, but the way the Internet nowadays is structured, it is in noone's interest to let people say this without censure. That is why I appreciate these forums. Even though the audience is small, it's still an audience.
Graak
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:50 pm

Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:09 am

Plain censure or expressed discomfort for one player expressing his negative thoughts about any given game is something that I really grew bored of.

From the WFRP forums sponsored by the local publisher and translator...
...to Facebook groups where admins receive free books to "review".

Those are not free-speech places, imho they are only another advertising amplifiers.

That's the reason I really appreciate this forum. Thanks!
FasterThanJesus
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2019 4:30 pm
Location: UK

Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:45 am

Those rpg.net forums are a bit of a joke. I occasionally read threads on there and often left perplexed at how moderated they are.

There was a thread about Cubicle 7 dropping The One Ring with one poster asking serious questions about Cubicle 7's ability to deliver. This got the poster banned from the thread despite the questions being reasonable and relavent. I actually think that poor project management may well be the route cause of those other issues we see here. I don't think Cubicle 7 have an issue with creativity, they have an issue with discipline and organisation.

I also saw CapnZapp getting banned from a thread for some reason.

And with that, I'm breaking my earlier point of going off topic.
Leith
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2020 8:17 pm

Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:41 pm

CapnZapp wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:41 am
Anyway, I would have loved for "WFRP4 is a trainwreck" to have become common knowledge, and not let C7 get away with a game that fails on so many fronts, but the way the Internet nowadays is structured, it is in noone's interest to let people say this without censure. That is why I appreciate these forums. Even though the audience is small, it's still an audience.
Have you considered, maybe, possibly, with the slimmest of chances, that some people, not all mind you, but certainly some, actually like WFRP4? Fiddly bits and all.

I don't mind the complexity. Advantage and mods and the +SL to damage, I find, make combat decisive. The various mods and extra rules are a bit much to keep in your head but I can't think of one I hate or one that would break the game if forgotten or removed.

That being said though, I get where people are coming from. This is far from an ideal way to design a combat system. I like it because it has interesting mechanics to play with and the flaws just don't matter to me, which is to say I don't view them as flaws. From my point of view it works.

The bestiary is mainly a problem for me because it has exactly 0 advice on how to adjust the challenge of combat, or other scenarios involving opposed rolls. Which does imply that the design team didn't have any good ideas about how to go about these things. I'll be interested to see what has gone into the GM guide in this regard.
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:19 am

Leith wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:41 pm
Have you considered, maybe, possibly, with the slimmest of chances, that some people, not all mind you, but certainly some, actually like WFRP4? Fiddly bits and all.
you can find adherents to every game system, if you look hard enough (there's still people playing first edition dungeons and dragons out there) but that doesn't mean the system is any good. i'm sure we can all agree that someone out there is going to like it, but that doesn't mean it's not a steaming pile someone dumped on the bedsheets.
Leith wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:41 pm
The bestiary is mainly a problem for me because it has exactly 0 advice on how to adjust the challenge of combat, or other scenarios involving opposed rolls. Which does imply that the design team didn't have any good ideas about how to go about these things. I'll be interested to see what has gone into the GM guide in this regard.
there is not stable way to adjust combat, the characters can vary too wildly (either forcing players to "keep up" with the most combat oriented member of the group or else forcing the GM to make wildly lopsided fights to satisfy everyone and still keep all their plates spinning) and the dice punish anything but having a massive advantage over the enemy leaving any balance at all in the hands of the GM. which seems to be a recurring theme, them expecting the GM to handle all the moving parts of the game without any guide rails to lean on without any protest or problem.

i'm fully expecting the GM book to mostly be fluff about considering the PCs better ad a few tables for random plot seeds.
Graak
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:50 pm

Sat Feb 15, 2020 2:26 am

Modding without being a mod mode On.

Steaming pile... Steaming turd.

Could we please stop crossing the limit and keep this debate to a reasonable level of decency?
Not that I'm anyhow offended by those terms (I use far worse terms in my daily life) but I can see this kind of talk will get us nowhere when one part barricades themselves behind such epithets. And, on my part, in all sincerity last thing I would like is giving WFRP4 fans any excuse to label this forum as a toxic grognard hole proving that somehow 4th edition opposition is pure grognardy (imho, it's not. It's a factor, but 4th edition remains basically a BIG MESS).

Having said that, please let's restrain our enthusiasm (or lack of it).


Modding without being a mod mode Off.


By my part I hardly think there will be any (valid) advice on how "adjust" combat encounter given the unstable snowballing mechanics that constitute the core of 4th edition.

But let's see...
CommanderCax
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 1:43 pm

Sat Feb 15, 2020 3:31 am

As probably the oldest grognard around, I am also of the opinion the system is indeed fiddly at times that it really hurts (e.g. having like 4 Cool tests if using Intimidate to cause Fear...), but after one year of real game experience with 4th ed. I can say it is more straightforward in many senses that 1st and 2nd ed. by far (where (pillow-)fights could take hours of frustrating dice rolls)...

Calling it a trainwreck or a steaming pile of **** does not sound very mature, but maybe fits to the radical statements of todays internet culture... :? .
User avatar
Toby Pilling
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 5:14 am

Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:14 am

I've been playing WFRP since it first came out in 1986, through all editions, and I quite like this most recent one. I've been playing in a campaign for over a year with numerous combats and not found anything broken in the system.
RancidWalrus
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:28 am

Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:19 pm

Orin J. wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:19 am
i'm fully expecting the GM book to mostly be fluff about considering the PCs better ad a few tables for random plot seeds.
Are we expecting a GM book? Sorry, I don't keep up with the news and wasn't expecting one (1e and 2e didn't i believe, and 3e maybe?)

FWIW, My group and I are enjoying 4e with houserules (I had a bigger problem with 2e's foibles so far), but I am always trying to improve the game I run, so having problems pointed out is always appreciated! Secret problems can't be fixed.

While a better bestiary and guidance on its usage would be nice, it is possible to go too far with it and make it too structured; I can't stand to play D&D anymore - the assumption that the encounters are 'balanced' takes away any sense of danger and leads my groups to limit their strategies to 'charge' (This is both as a player and GM). This doesn't happen in WFRP, even with the underpowered opponents presented in the book, there is always a sense of fear and danger (and then they 1-shot the enemy leader/monster of course!).
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:04 pm

RancidWalrus wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:19 pm
Orin J. wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:19 am
i'm fully expecting the GM book to mostly be fluff about considering the PCs better ad a few tables for random plot seeds.
Are we expecting a GM book? Sorry, I don't keep up with the news and wasn't expecting one (1e and 2e didn't i believe, and 3e maybe?)
the rumor is they're making a GM-focused book, i dunno if officially it's been confirmed and honestly i'm waiting until we see it hit print to state C7 is doing anything for a fact...
Graak
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:50 pm

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:21 am

RancidWalrus wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:19 pm
I can't stand to play D&D anymore - the assumption that the encounters are 'balanced' takes away any sense of danger and leads my groups to limit their strategies to 'charge' (This is both as a player and GM). This doesn't happen in WFRP
This never happened in WFRP.
Balanced doesn't means "you can do whatever you want and you finally win". What I mean is that a bestiary should take effort to introduce some criteria to evaluate the lethality of a given creature for the PCs or to adjust it to the desiderable level of lethality (rising or lowering stats and adding a few talents or skills without becoming insane while doing it).
D&D took "balance" concept at an absurd mathematical level (because the way levels are structured there is an abyss between a low level and a high level PC).
RancidWalrus
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:28 am

Sun Feb 16, 2020 11:48 pm

I agree completely!
Post Reply