Emirikol said:

Talent Socketing: Maybe new to RPGs (even then, not sure), but certainly has been done in things like board games before (it is the single mnost board gamey aspect of the whole system to me).

Trait Matching: It is basically the same as the old WFRP career entries and exits, but with a little more variety and flexibility.

Fatigue and Stress: Well, Yepesnopes has said it has been done before. I personally haven't seen a system like it before. Yes, there have been non-lethal damage mechanics, fatigue mechanics and other things, but using these essentially as a player resource? Not saying it is unique, or original, but it certainly is more unusual.

Fatigue appears already in games as old as Rune Quest and Ars Magica back in the eighties, and as for stress, you can find it for example in the FATE game system, probably gurps also, I cannot recall it now.

Although I say these are not new, I think on the other hand that the way fatigue and stress are implemented in game mechanics is brilliant.

Indeed, me and my group of players find the main mechanics of the game (such as oppossed checks, recharge tokens…) rather poor, and it is the dice and the submechanics of the game such as disease, critical wounds, insanities, corruption… the ones that keep us playing this game (appart from the setting of course). I find the implementation of the submechanics gorgeously done, very very very nice.

Cheers,

Yepes 

Most of the ideas used in WFRP 3e appears in some other games, here we just get all them in one place.

Best and innovative are the dice, also the disease mechanic is good. In the new WFRP this couls be made by making types of Talents so that the Disease would block one type of  Talents. Like I said it would be not that hard to make from that we have a new better version of WFRP. Yes, the mechanics would need to be slightly different but it would work. Maybe even it could use the same dice as WFRP 3e is using.

So if FFG would base the new edition of WFRP on the 3rd one, reprint some stuff with small changes  then it would not take that much time to make a new WFRP. Maybe even we would see it this year or the annoucement of it. Everything is possible!

I don't think that there could not more then one RPG game comming this year. For example FFG work in the same time on Only War and SW Edge of the Empire. So that's not a problem to announce a new WFRP or to work on it becouse there are more then one design team responsible for RPGs.

Cheers

Yepesnopes said:

I wouldn't say opposed checks are one of the main mechanics, but I would agree that they are one of the less well realised parts of the system. I personally don't mind the recharge mechanics, but the opposed mechanics don't work very well, and they seem to have realised that for the Star Wars RPG and revamped them slightly.

borithan said:

I am with EotE now and I am happy that indeed they cleaned /improved this sort of things.

I am hoping to play it soon.

How do they do opposed checks in EotE?

jh

Emirikol said:

The bad dice mirror the good dice in function (though they aren't mirrored in symbol distribution).

If you would roll 4 dice and upgrade 1 to take an action with a skill, when that skill opposes someone the opponent rolls 4 bad dice and upgrades 1.

Is there any reason we couldn't just do this for WFRP?

..and, is this system perfect/better than other systems out there?

jh

Emirikol said:

The dice in SW are more symmetric than in WFRP.

The Ability dice line up with the Challenge dice, and the Proficiency dice line up with the Challenge dice, so that you can build a "negative" dice pool to roll against. 

In WFRP, the dice are too asymmetric to do this. There is no negative equivalent of Ability dice or Expertise dice, let alone the Reckless and Conservative.

The only things we have that are symmetric are the fortune/misfortune dice. 

Our group played a session last weekend and we really enjoyed it. I've run this edition of WFRP for a while (so I know where it shines and sinks), and I think the new system is a lot cleaner and was much easier to manage. That was only one session, mind you, but I think its a definite improvement.

It's funny to hear that, as the playtester report for WFRP was "accidentally" released that there was an "orange" die at one point that was the symmetry of the Yellow die.

The playtesters dumped it/ditched it as they didn't like something about it.  I believe I recall that the playtesters felt that the game was "too easy to predict" the probabilities.  I guess we'll see if the simplified version of EotE holds up to time, or if it is in the same situation 2 years from now as we are talking about here :)

jh

Like Doc said the EotE is a little clearer and easy. I also had funn when I had a chance to play it. So I really would like to see a WFRP edition silimar to EotE. I think that it would not take that much time for FFG to use all the good and best elements of WFRP and to reprint it in EotE form. They could base the new WFRP on alll that they created for the 3rd edition and use it with some changes in WFRP 3.5/4e. I my opinion this would not take too much time - from 3 to 8 months. If they arer already working on it then the time of changes will come soon. Keep my fingers crossed for that! FFG give us a better WFRP!

I don't say that WFRP 3e is bad, it the better then previous WFRP edition, but not the best there could be. Every edition of WFRP had something good in it but FFG should try to make the game better.

And I recommend that everyone who has not yet tried SW EotE to give it a try. You will not regret, it's always fun to try a new game and this one is good.

So FFG should make a new better edition of WFRP for sure! And almost sure they will but the only question is when will we know about it.

Cheers

willmanx said:

Modify the opposed checks in wfrp 3 to obtain a 50% chance of success is not difficult. What you propose is an option, dividing the characteristic by two is another. The problem is again that by doing so you are changing other things of the game that depend on that. For example, with your house rules the added value of rising a characteristic is less appealing compared to adding fortune dice. Rising a characteristics is expensive, but it is very rewarding because difficulty of opposed checks is obtained by comparing characteristics. If on the other hand the difficulty of the test does not depend on the characterisitc comparision but only on the passive characteristic, then its is cheaper and better to add fortune dice since 70% of the time PCs are the active part.

Another example is action cards resolution. You have action cards like Backstab which targets the Target Observation (Int), since melee action cards target mostly Target Defence, which is always an Easy 1d check, by changing the opposed checks rules you are making cards like Backstab a worse action card as compared to other melee cards that target Defence. With this house rule, someone with Ag 4 will not feel any difference indeed, but someone with Ag 5 should be quite pissed, since his action card Backstab is more difficult to achieve than most melee action cards, and certainly the difficulty of the card is not reflected in its efficiency. One the other hand, someone with Ag 3 will be very happy, since backstabing a targets has come easier for him.

I am not saying is a bad house rule, it is more reasonable from the probabilistic point of view, and if it works for you is fine. My point is that it is tied to other components of the mechanics of the game, and you alter also these things which breaks the delicate equilibrium of the game. Just a reflection.

Cheers,

Yepes

Emirikol said:

In my opinion, it is a pity they did so.

And regarding the play testers who said probabilities were "too easy to predict" by including yet one more dice!… they must have been like Rain Man at least!

Emirikol said:

What do you mean? Is there a plan for an advanced version of EotE? I haven't seen it anounced, neither people in the forums talk about it.

Cheers,

Yepes

willmanx said: