Ron B. Stard said:

Because as a roleplayer I know how to put my priorities in ROLEPLAYING and not in the administrative tools for roleplaying. 'Nuff said...

Varnias Tybalt said:

Ah, so you won't be needing WFRP3 either?

Hellebore

Ron B. Stard said:

Instead of just ranting, could you actually tell us what about the party card you dislike? From what I can tell, it is a way of representing group resources and the level of party cohesion. The party has a pool of fortune points (the group will have to decide who gets to use them and when), a tension meter that the GM adds to based on roleplaying and a section for putting special 'group' abilities that the characters have picked up (for example, tactics are probably combat tactics that they've trained in). The key words at the top (mercenary, infamous) are (I believe) related to changing careers - if you are swords for hire it is easier for you to change to mercenary or infamous careers.

Pretty much any of these mechanics are ones that I'd consider adding to WFRP 2e. Party fortune points - interesting. Group tactics - very interesting. Allowing players to change into careers that reflect the type of advenuring they are doing - just makes sense. And assigning penalties based on stress within the group - nice roleplaying tool.

macd21 said:

Will do so in a moment when I have more time, but in the mean time can you clarify exactly where I am 'ranting'? Is it simply because I said something negative about the game, or is the tone of the post somehow off? Because I can't see this ranting at all? I'll get back to you with my thougths on the party card a bit later, ok?

DagobahDave said:

Back to the good old days then. You do know that you're only supposed to play a Witch Hunter in the game don't you? FFG have clearly adopted a marketing strategy that's intended to court controversy so you shouldn't be surprised if people get upset. Besides which there are just as many personal and provocative remarks being made by the cheerleaders for v.3 as by its naysayers. You seem to be over reacting to Ron B.Stard's comments quite drastically, considering that there's been far more outrageous things said on these forums over the past few days, generally with rather less intelligence though. Perhaps that's what's upsetting? If ganging up on someone isn't enough you have to ban them instead?

Ah well, burn the witches!

macd21 said:

Is such a short post really counted as ranting?

I'm not sure on the mechanics and the card looks strange to me as I've never played anything similar before that involves cards to such a level of depth. 

In the end it seems like the big crux is the bits and cards. For example, if the party card above wasn't an actual card and the rules were just written in an orthodox way in the core rulebook I think the reactions would be much more favourable (shared Fortune pool, advancement tags, party tactics etc). Some people are horrified and think these extra bits will make it play like a board game while others see them as helpful tools to enhance the roleplaying experience. Only time will tell who's right (although I'm betting on the latter ).

Ron, I'm also curious to hear what you think is so horribly wrong with the party card. Whenever you get around to it.

Gilead te tuin lothain said:

When his posts are nothing but "this sux" without any commentary on why he believes so... I suppose that would be closer to trolling than ranting. Though taken as a whole...

As for the cards - you could easily use the party mechanics (from what I can tell) without using cards. The cards seem to be for ease of use, in this case, rather than anything else. They are a handy reference. As I said before, the concepts therein would be good additions to 2ed, with or without the cards.

Hellebore said:

Nope.

But im willing to give the system a try at least, since it seem to be so different from conventional systems. Which is more than I can say about 2nd or 1st edition because they haven't attracted my interest at all, hence why I don't own them. (im not that big a fan of the Warhammer fantasy world anyway, and because a quick readhtough of their buggy and stifling rules, along with the fact that they are played as conventional RPG's there's not many turn-on's in those editions for me)

But BECAUSE of the 3rd edition's seemingly different approach to it's game administration and mechanics, it looks quite interesting. So while I loathe the effort of having to roleplay in the Warhammer Fantasy setting, I guess I can stand the sacrifice in order to try something new.

Captin' said:

The just borrow the card to look up what you need and then give it back. Really, how far away are you from your fellow players during a game?

Don't have to argue about it being a card game. Thanks for pointing out that Monopoly and Clue are some of the most popular card games ever.