|
Post by simrion on Jun 14, 2024 18:57:56 GMT -5
Hello Fellow Murkhillians!
Any Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay gamers here? I've played some sporadic games myself, mostly first edition. Have a friend who is an avid Warhammer Fantasy and 40K player who has run WHFRP on and off but never for long. It's certainly grim and gritty and can have an unusual amount of by-in due the well documented campaign world (intimidating like RuneQuest's Glorantha.) What I have played I've enjoyed. Game certainly forces you to be cautious as battle is truly dangerous to characters and healing is not as instantaneous as might be in other games. Thoughts or anecdotes to share? Bueller? Bueller?
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jun 16, 2024 9:15:02 GMT -5
Hello Fellow Murkhillians!
Any Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay gamers here? I've played some sporadic games myself, mostly first edition. Have a friend who is an avid Warhammer Fantasy and 40K player who has run WHFRP on and off but never for long. It's certainly grim and gritty and can have an unusual amount of by-in due the well documented campaign world (intimidating like RuneQuest's Glorantha.) What I have played I've enjoyed. Game certainly forces you to be cautious as battle is truly dangerous to characters and healing is not as instantaneous as might be in other games. Thoughts or anecdotes to share? Bueller? Bueller?
I ran one game and played one game. I never really had further aims. I do admit it played well and the rule book was a fantastic resource.
|
|
|
Post by simrion on Jun 17, 2024 4:57:33 GMT -5
Hello Fellow Murkhillians!
Any Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay gamers here? I've played some sporadic games myself, mostly first edition. Have a friend who is an avid Warhammer Fantasy and 40K player who has run WHFRP on and off but never for long. It's certainly grim and gritty and can have an unusual amount of by-in due the well documented campaign world (intimidating like RuneQuest's Glorantha.) What I have played I've enjoyed. Game certainly forces you to be cautious as battle is truly dangerous to characters and healing is not as instantaneous as might be in other games. Thoughts or anecdotes to share? Bueller? Bueller?
I ran one game and played one game. I never really had further aims. I do admit it played well and the rule book was a fantastic resource.
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Jun 17, 2024 16:35:55 GMT -5
The original rulebook had a TON of information in it, and I found a copy for $5 at a garage sale. It "disappeared" years ago, and I did buy the second edition. I skipped the 3rd edition that seemed more like a board game rather than a rpg. I'm intrigued by the size and the thickness of the 4th edition and may pick it up to see if it holds up.
|
|
|
Post by simrion on Jun 18, 2024 5:35:34 GMT -5
It's certainly "grittier" than D&D at least where player damage and subsequent healing are concerned. Rules for accomplishing things seem to be efficient from what little experience I have. Like the RuneQuest default campaign the Old World is rich and well documented. Could be a barrier to entry by "newbies." Not to say you have to use the Old World of course.
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Jun 18, 2024 6:12:46 GMT -5
It's certainly "grittier" than D&D at least where player damage and subsequent healing are concerned. Rules for accomplishing things seem to be efficient from what little experience I have. Like the RuneQuest default campaign the Old World is rich and well documented. Could be a barrier to entry by "newbies." Not to say you have to use the Old World of course. A fair assessment.
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jun 18, 2024 9:50:38 GMT -5
It's certainly "grittier" than D&D at least where player damage and subsequent healing are concerned. Rules for accomplishing things seem to be efficient from what little experience I have. Like the RuneQuest default campaign the Old World is rich and well documented. Could be a barrier to entry by "newbies." Not to say you have to use the Old World of course. When you say '"grittier" than D&D at least where player damage and subsequent healing are concerned' are you talking about unaltered OD&D or later iterations?
|
|
|
Post by simrion on Jun 18, 2024 18:19:26 GMT -5
It's certainly "grittier" than D&D at least where player damage and subsequent healing are concerned. Rules for accomplishing things seem to be efficient from what little experience I have. Like the RuneQuest default campaign the Old World is rich and well documented. Could be a barrier to entry by "newbies." Not to say you have to use the Old World of course. When you say '"grittier" than D&D at least where player damage and subsequent healing are concerned' are you talking about unaltered OD&D or later iterations? Any D&D TBQH. In D&D you have hits/HP and it's treated more in a gamist manner. WHFRP had hits/HP modified by critical hits that have a significant potential adverse effect beyond going low and eventually dying. And healing is far less ubiquitous as well. My particular gamemaster likes to play down the spell casting classes so no magical healing. You either rest in the inn or seek out a chirurgeon (surgeon) who is just as likely to injure your character as heal them. To me it screams a more simulationist bent vs D&D.
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jun 18, 2024 21:33:25 GMT -5
When you say '"grittier" than D&D at least where player damage and subsequent healing are concerned' are you talking about unaltered OD&D or later iterations? Any D&D TBQH. In D&D you have hits/HP and it's treated more in a gamist manner. WHFRP had hits/HP modified by critical hits that have a significant potential adverse effect beyond going low and eventually dying. And healing is far less ubiquitous as well. My particular gamemaster likes to play down the spell casting classes so no magical healing. You either rest in the inn or seek out a chirurgeon (surgeon) who is just as likely to injure your character as heal them. To me it screams a more simulationist bent vs D&D. I have always used critical hits since the very beginning, although we did not call them that. We used*, "if you roll a natural 20, roll again and on the second natural 20, the target is dead." That was the same rule for the PCs and the monsters. I like having chirurgeons that cannot be trusted. That is a nice twist (realistic too). Since we usually only had one Cleric, we did a lot of natural slow healing. *Over the 4 years of college with an average of about 16-18 players per game session, we averaged a double 20 kill about 3 times per game session. (average game session was about 10 hours or so)
|
|
|
Post by simrion on Jun 19, 2024 6:39:32 GMT -5
Any D&D TBQH. In D&D you have hits/HP and it's treated more in a gamist manner. WHFRP had hits/HP modified by critical hits that have a significant potential adverse effect beyond going low and eventually dying. And healing is far less ubiquitous as well. My particular gamemaster likes to play down the spell casting classes so no magical healing. You either rest in the inn or seek out a chirurgeon (surgeon) who is just as likely to injure your character as heal them. To me it screams a more simulationist bent vs D&D. I have always used critical hits since the very beginning, although we did not call them that. We used*, "if you roll a natural 20, roll again and on the second natural 20, the target is dead." That was the same rule for the PCs and the monsters. I like having chirurgeons that cannot be trusted. That is a nice twist (realistic too). Since we usually only had one Cleric, we did a lot of natural slow healing. *Over the 4 years of college with an average of about 16-18 players per game session, we averaged a double 20 kill about 3 times per game session. (average game session was about 10 hours or so) Ooooh Double 20 that is good! Creates that dangerous sense of uncertainty
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jun 19, 2024 8:48:42 GMT -5
I have always used critical hits since the very beginning, although we did not call them that. We used*, "if you roll a natural 20, roll again and on the second natural 20, the target is dead." That was the same rule for the PCs and the monsters. I like having chirurgeons that cannot be trusted. That is a nice twist (realistic too). Since we usually only had one Cleric, we did a lot of natural slow healing. *Over the 4 years of college with an average of about 16-18 players per game session, we averaged a double 20 kill about 3 times per game session. (average game session was about 10 hours or so) Ooooh Double 20 that is good! Creates that dangerous sense of uncertainty One guy, late in the campaign, had an 8th level fighter who met a balrog in a doorway in single combat. I always ran combat as simultaneous and did not use initiative. So he as the fighter rolled a Double 20 and I (ref) as the balrog rolled a Double 20. Mutual destruction!
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Jun 19, 2024 9:58:12 GMT -5
Ooooh Double 20 that is good! Creates that dangerous sense of uncertainty One guy, late in the campaign, had an 8th level fighter who met a balrog in a doorway in single combat. I always ran combat as simultaneous and did not use initiative. So he as the fighter rolled a Double 20 and I (ref) as the balrog rolled a Double 20. Mutual destruction!
|
|