Caveat I should mention I was only a player in the game not the GM and I haven't got the rules first hand only what I've read through extensive posts.  I did though ask plenty of questions during the session as to how/why calls were being made.  I came off as a little rules lawyerie but it was more just because I wanted to get a stronger grasp of what was happening behind the scenes on the GM side, since that's likely how I'll be playing this game in the future.

Quote from: Technomancer;348647So...your character is not able to perform these special attacks unles you (the player) are holding a particular card?  And your character immediately loses the ability to perform this attack once you no longer have the card?

Well there are about 10 or so standard actions that every character has from regular melee/ranged attacks, defense, and misc as well as a stunt.  Each character then can spend points at chargen to learn special actions which are on cards.  Those special actions could be like a twin weapon strike, a sweeping strike, backstab (beyond just getting a bonus for being in a good position which anyone could do), shouts, whatever.  Lots of actions to pick from and use and it's up to you how action card based you want a character to be.  You could put everyting into stats and just have 1 special action card.  As for how they work each round (talking combat) you can do one maneuver and one action for free.  Maneuvers are things like moving, drawing a weapon etc... Actions are well an action so performing a basic action or special action card.  Once you play that card it's not gone.  It'll either be available again next round or you may have to wait a round or two to use it again.  The Trollslayer can't do his huge sweaping attack every round for example (though there are mechanics to make those cards refresh faster at the cost of stress/fatigue/luck).  There are some cards that can only be used once per encounter but they are by far the exception not the norm.  Most cards can either be used every round or every 2-3 rounds.

Quote from: TechnomancerThis sounds awfully meta-gamey, and is the kind of thing that ruins immersion for me.

I thought I'd feel the same. But you are just making choices like in any other rpg.  In WFRP 2 you are either doing a basic attack, swift, full, defensive, guarded etc.... they are the same kinda choices you make there as you do in 3.0.  The difference is that in 3.0 you have a card in front of you that says what those various actions do.  You don't need to remember how to perform an maneuver action or how the wrestling feat effects grapple.  It's on a card.  Also there is a much larger variety of cards to allow for more interesting effects then in past editions.  

Quote from: TechnomancerThey seem about equally fast now, do you get the feeling this version will play even faster than 2nd once you have a few more games under your belt and are more used to the system?

I'd be interested in hearing more about the differences in combat.  I'm a little confused, on the one hand you say it's more abstract, but then you mention special attacks and other specific actions which sounds less abstract.  How exactly does it differ?   Take us through a round of combat in WFRP 3E.

Let me talk about none-combat first, it's a little more straight forward.
None combat actions essentially work the same.  You say "I want to do X" and the GM says "Ok Roll"  You then build your dice pool (it's this dice pool building that I think will get faster).  Building a dice pool is pretty quick but does take longer then rolling a couple percentile no argument there.  However it's not like it takes 5 mins to build a pool.  You grab a number of dice equal to a stat, grab a couple more dice equal to skills & specialties.  The difference is you draw different dice then say 6 d10's.  Once you know what your going to roll the GM puts in some difficulty dice to represent the difficulty of the action and/or miss fortune dice to represent factors outside of the difficulty.  This is left rather objectively to the GM so some GM's will like the freedom and flexibility others won't.  This is true of most of WFRP 3.0.  It offers more guidelines of rules then hard fast rules with applications to every conceivable outcome.  It's in many ways like WFRP 2.0 in that respect.  They just had the +/- 30 difficulty chart.  Here you hand out challenge/fortune dice.  

The big advantage I see is that because not every outcome on the challenge/fortune dice will make things worse for the player you have more freedom to assign difficulties then I ever felt comfortable with in WFRP 2 plus admittedly the pool mechanics as a whole make starting characters a little more competent.  That being said there were plenty of failures in the session we ran.

Now you spent extra time creating your dice pool, that's rewarded in the results.  The result will tell you not only if you succeeded but if it took you longer, if you were sloppy if you succeeded by the luck of your pants or failed because of some outside factor.  You again have the freedom to use as much or as little of that information as you like.  If all that matters is picking the lock then you can ignore the rest.  However if you succeeded in picking it, but took your sweet time about it that could be important or perhaps you would have succeeded but misfortune dice caused a failure so it would be within reason for the GM to say you picked the lock but broke your picks in the processes.  Again no hard rules for it, just guide lines on how to use an interpret the results.  It'll be freeing for some players and initially (or perhaps deal killing) for others.  For me and the group we were playing in it worked really well.

Now on to combat.  Flow of combat is still fairly standard
Roll initiative
Take actions
Post round wrap up. - Fairly stock to most traditional RPG's.  Where 3.0 varies is in the details.

Roll Initiative:
As I mentioned initiative, everyone still makes a roll so so some people will roll better then others.  But just because you rolled the fastest it may be more tactical to let the slow tank go faster then the speedy elf.  You have that choice.  Next round the elf could go first if it's more important.  If it comes to a tie between PC's and Monsters PC's go first - they are the Hero's.  It's a nice simple system that takes all that other options out of the way no need to hold actions or bump your init around to position yourself.  It's all just done on the fly essentially.  It helps the narrative and the tactical setup because those who should go first generally get to.  

Take actions:
Every character gets one maneuver and one action.  Not much different then WFRP 2's action round split into 2 1/2 actions.  In fact you can think of it the same way.  You can even get extra move actions like in WFRP 2 but you don't spend fortune points you gain fatigue.  
You then place your attack.  This will be playing some action (could be a basic melee attack or it could be a Troll-Felling Strike special action).  You form your dice pool and roll.  The results not only tell you if you hit but how much damage you did and any other special effects like crits or other things (depends on the card) again the GM may interprit fortune dice as the situation demands, those miss-fortune dice caused you to miss so he could allow the hit to land but cause your weapon to get stuck in your opponent or go flying or he could just treat it as a miss.  I think this will really fall strongly with certain groups and certain types of players.

So in 3.0 you make one combat roll unlike 2.0 where you make an attack see if he parries it then roll damage, perhaps check for crits etc.... The overall time to do those actions in 2.0 is really quick.  It takes about the same time to make your pool and figure out the results in 3.0 as it does to make the separate dice rolls in 2.0.  However I have to say that pulling off the various maneuvers in 3.0 felt more interesting then just swing-and-a-miss results that 2.0 generates.  Which is what I meant.  The overall length of combat doesn't change however the round to round results are more telling.  2.0 always was more of a blow by blow account of combat.  3.0 the combat rounds felt more like a highlight of the action.  

I also much prefer the damage mechanic in 3.0 for the simple fact that you can crit someone before killing them.  You may crit them on the first attack which could lead to a significant advantage for the rest of combat.  Like you often see in the movies someone off the start slicing someones hand or leg but then continuing the fight.  Under past editions of WFRP you couldn't crit someone until they were near death.  Now there is more flavor options.  Also there are (as far as I saw) no instant kill crits.  It's not the crit that will kill you.  You need to do more damage then their wounds for monsters.  PC's die if they have more criticals then their Toughness AND lose all their wounds.  They've also calmed the crits a bit so don't expect to see any arms being lopped off.  Which is both good and bad.  However realistically if a PC gets an arm lopped off they are likely dead anyway so it's kinda moot.

But that last part there is key.  You could theoretically take 5 or 6 crits if your toughness is only 3 but still live as long as you don't take more damage then your wounds.  If that happens you die.

Post Round actions:
The only other part of the combat round is tracking refreshes on various action cards which is just simply done at the end of your turn.  It's something we didn't even notice, it's minor.

I played a trollslayer and I was cutting through Beastmen (not minions) either every couple of rounds.  Oh minions - yeah there are minion rules if you want to use them.  Our GM didn't so I can't say how well they work or not.  It's a take it or leave it rule that you can use if you want to make your PC's feel more bad ass then usual.

I'm still not sold on it.
I do think that the die-mechanic sounds rather nifty, but it's way too bloody expensive for a nifty mechanic. All the cards and counters look real pretty, but they're starting to annoy me, even if I haven't seen the thing! And what's with the elves..?

I'm gonna buy this one. I might chip in on the campaign they're planning. If that blows me away, perhaps I'll fold.

Well, as opposed as I am to much of the thinking behind this game, its interesting to read a positive comment about it from someone who has actual experience of the full-blown game, so thank you for contributing that.

RPGPundit

Quote from: kryyst;348602Other nice changes the initiative system is fantastic.  Unlike most other RPG's where everyone rolls init then takes actions in turn.  You still roll init but it's a group initiative.  Which means that the group gets to decide who acts when.  So even if you rolled the lowest initiative you may go first because it's more beneficial tactically for the group.

Interesting - I've seen that used occasionally in other (cinematic) games as well, but never actually written into the rules.

Im not interested in buying or playing it, but it does seem that most people who have played it seem positive about it.

I have enough fantasy RPGs to last me a lifetime.

(Runequest, Cthulhu Dark Ages, Tunnels & Trolls, D&D, AD&D, OD&D, Wheel of Time, D20 D&D, MERP, WHFRP 2, Cadwallon, Castles & Crusades)

Not to mention if I can get Dragon Age for like 20-24 bucks I would grab it too.

The price of V3 and the sheer CHANGE is the biggest problem though.

That initiative thing really turns me off... not that I was turned on to begin with...
It sounds like the sort of game that will appeal to folks who like that sort of game.

Quote from: Simlasa;348828That initiative thing really turns me off... not that I was turned on to begin with...
It sounds like the sort of game that will appeal to folks who like that sort of game.

You mean people that like tactics and choice?  Odd lot that is.

Great comments, better frankly than I've seen elsewhere, so much appreciated Kryyst.  I doubt it's for me, but I'd happily try playing it, way too expensive for me to actually buy though.

Thanks for that rundown, kryyst.  It still doesn't quite sound like my cup o' Joe, but I do have a clearer picture of it now.

So those cards are more like a quick reference (so that you don't have to go flipping through the book), I guess.

Quote from: Captain Rufus;348814Im not interested in buying or playing it, but it does seem that most people who have played it seem positive about it.

For the price you'd have to feel pretty dumb to buy it and not like it.

Quote from: Technomancer;348908Thanks for that rundown, kryyst.  It still doesn't quite sound like my cup o' Joe, but I do have a clearer picture of it now.

So those cards are more like a quick reference (so that you don't have to go flipping through the book), I guess.

Kinda.  But it's not to save you from flipping through the book.  The action specific rules only exist on the cards.  Same with the careers.  It's not that the cards are quick references like the action cards for D&D4e.  In this case they are the only source for those rules.  Which is unfortunate, but at the same time if they were printing all the rules from the cards into the book it'd be akin to trying to print all the rules for MtG in book format.  Just wouldn't work and it'd be impractical to do so.

The idea with this game, which I get.  Is that they create a core set of rules then expand it's use through cards.  So more careers they issue a card deck.  It keeps their production costs way down and they can do smaller expansions easier.  Plus it's hard to argue with the $$$ that can be made in a collectible market.  Consumers seem to be eating that shit up.

It's interesting in reading through all the preview material and even other peoples play reviews.  I was still on the fence and pretty much reserved to not liking it.  But in play it runs really well.  Now that's filtered through the guy we had running it (who had only run it once before but is a good GM).  The game will work better for some groups then others, that holds true for any RPG.

If I could have one point stick from this it's that WFRP 3.0 is an RPG without a doubt.  There's no limits on freedom of choice, action or deed.  When you are playing a game it doesn't feel like you are trapped or bound by the confines of a boardgame in any way shape or form.  The hole hybrid idea that seems to prevail (and I'm fully guilty of saying it msyelf initially) is only in the tools at your disposal and not in their use.  

A the risk of sounding like a total shill or horrendously cliche.  The big dichotomy with WFRP 3.0 is that I actually found this game to be more freeing then past versions of WFRP.   The reason I say that is because the dice pool mechanics actually help in a freaky rules light way to help support the story and actions with as much comfort as the group wants to put into them.  Also having the action cards there go a long way in helping variety, especially in combat.  WFRP 2.0 had lots of options but in play I found that most people picked their specific go-to action and just used it over and over again.  They often would forget of all the cool little tactical things you could try because they didn't have the rules readily available.  Here though you have all the rules at your finger tips and can see the potential results on the cards for using them.  It's a case of knowledge is power.  Fuck that's horrendously lame sounding.  But it's true.

I have this card that lets me pull this off, well hell why not use it.  Here's another cool card, I'll use that too... This holds true for combats and social actions and yes there is a default card that essentially says "do whatever you want'  and in terms of stunt mechanics it can't get much easier then that.  I've played plenty of Feng Shui and other games that have stunting mechanics.  They talk about degrees of the stunt and how the effects should work and all that crap.  This is easier.  You say what you want roll your pool and the card gives you a very solid indication of how well you pulled off the stunt.  Super simple.

Where I think WFRP 3.0 greatest weaknesses lie is that sharing cards sucks for larger groups.   You absolutely can share cards but it just sucks.  It's not as fun as having your own little deck of actions that you can hold and hug and flip through at your leisure.   I'm sure they'll start fixing this by releasing single character packs of cards/dice.  They'd be silly not to.  The GM shills out $100 for the game then a few players spend maybe $15 for a single character pack.

Secondly everything is heavily geared to work in this specific setting.  It's not a game you can easily strip the rules out of and do your own thing with.  It's just not.  I've used WFRP to run a Weird West themed game before and that's not realistically possible with 3.0.  Actually just customizing it in general becomes more tricky.  WFRP 3.0 is a self contained game.  It works really well for what it does but don't expect to use it as a kind of universal system.

But I'm not trying to sell anyone on the idea.  Just to settle some fears and concerns.

Quote from: Machinegun Blue;348918For the price you'd have to feel pretty dumb to buy it and not like it.

Yeah, but keep in mind a lot of positive reviews are also from people that have only played the game and not bought it.  Which is the case for me and everyone else in our group (well cept the GM he bought it and wanted to like it, which he did).

Quote from: kryyst;348931WFRP 2.0 had lots of options but in play I found that most people picked their specific go-to action and just used it over and over again.  They often would forget of all the cool little tactical things you could try because they didn't have the rules readily available.  Here though you have all the rules at your finger tips and can see the potential results on the cards for using them.  It's a case of knowledge is power.  Fuck that's horrendously lame sounding.  But it's true.

I'm totally with you on that one. It's a combination of two things: a) having the actions represented on game components at all and b) doing that in a layout that's geared for direct use.

Thing is, that never oughta be consideration to really adopt a new game. If anything, it ought to be an incentive to create these sort of gadgets for whatever game currently rocks your group. Case in point, D&D 3.5 main rulebook is a PAIN IN THE ASS when it comes to table use - specifically with the type of PC actions you mention for Warhammer 2nd. So I made my players a reference sheet (using a lot of D&D 4E's much improved layout), and we've seen the options regularly used in combats ever since.

To be honest, I'm surprised that creating these gadgets as a practice isn't more widespread among RPGers. Among boardgamers, you'll find these sort of player aids for pretty much every game out there that gets played. RPGs players are customarily expected to know everything by heart.

Quote from: Windjammer;348944I'm totally with you on that one. It's a combination of two things: a) having the actions represented on game components at all and b) doing that in a layout that's geared for direct use.

Thing is, that never oughta be consideration to really adopt a new game. If anything, it ought to be an incentive to create these sort of gadgets for whatever game currently rocks your group. Case in point, D&D 3.5 main rulebook is a PAIN IN THE ASS when it comes to table use - specifically with the type of PC actions you mention for Warhammer 2nd. So I made my players a reference sheet (using a lot of D&D 4E's much improved layout), and we've seen the options regularly used in combats ever since.

To be honest, I'm surprised that creating these gadgets as a practice isn't more widespread among RPGers. Among boardgamers, you'll find these sort of player aids for pretty much every game out there that gets played. RPGs players are customarily expected to know everything by heart.

I did something similar for WFRP 2.  I created a play aid for the group and me.  It was just to time consuming to flip through the book just to look up an option that you may or may not use.  I think the other problem that a lot of games suffer from is that they often make all the maneuvers beyond the basic attack more complicated to use, often at an increased risk of failure and the payoff is only marginally more rewarding.  That or they create this list of prerequisites and situations that must exist before you can use them.  So when it's all said and done often the basic attack is the most useful attack.  Even worse potentially are actions that require you to power them up doing a bunch of basic crap.  Then you get the action powered up to use it but by then your target is dead or to a point where one more basic action would finish them off anyway.  It's self defeating.

WFRP 3.0 changed that up in that more often it's more interesting and useful to use an action card.  Leaving the basic attack stuff as the backup default when you've got nothing left to do.  Personally I think that's a pretty interesting shift from a role playing and gaming perspective in general.  It's not unlike the type of stuff you see in most other gaming mediums.  You exhaust your cool stuff first then fall back to basic attacks until you can do something cool again.  It's refreshing actually to see that as the core mindset in an RPG.

Quote from: kryyst;348950I did something similar for WFRP 2.  I created a play aid for the group and me.  It was just to time consuming to flip through the book just to look up an option that you may or may not use.

I photocopied the Combat Actions on a double-sided reference sheet, and that cut our book referencing in half.