Wednesday, 19 August 2009

A GenCon Impression of WFRP 3

Ouch. Anthony, of Los Angeles (blogging at, wrote his impression of WFRP 3 over at Grognardia:

I've had a long and close involvement, indeed love affair with WFRP from its earliest days in 1986. In fact, I fell in love with it just from the ad in Dragon - before the game was even released. To paraphrase the old Schick (or was it Gillette?) commercials, "I loved it so much I wrote books for the company."

So I looked with interest at the new 3rd edition of the game at GenCon last weekend, both the preview display and watching a demo being played.

This is not a roleplaying game. Oh, players can add roleplaying to it, just like you can add roleplaying to Monopoly, if you want, but this is not an RPG in the real sense of the word. It's as much a roleplaying game as Mordheim was.

And the price-point? $100 for a game limited to four players? Insanity. An FFG representative at a seminar at GenCon had the brass to suggest that the GM and players could split the cost. Oh, but if they want new powers and new careers, they have to buy later expansions.

Like I said: It's Mordheim. Or maybe Talisman or Heroquest. But "WFRP 3" is not a roleplaying game. And I think it's going to be a big bomb for FFG and GW.

Meanwhile, this grognard is sticking to WFRP 1E, which I am now converting to BRP.

I could not agree more with his sentiment. I'm sticking to WFRP 2ed for a very long time, until I retire and beyond it seems. I don't have enough 1ed material to go true grognard, but I have some very key pieces.

Thanks Anthony for your concise review!

Posted by caffeinated at 11:23 AM in d10

Friday, 14 August 2009

A better acronym...

WFRP 3 ... WFRP (3|4)e ... WFBG...

I posited that FFG took my WFRP to a place that mimics D&D 4e more than anything else. For this I used the regular expression, a notation device used in computer programming that denotes choice and patterns, "(3|4)e"; loosely translated to read as "is it 3rd edition or 4th."

I have since seen WFBG. Warhammer Fantasy Board Game. Much better.

Posted by caffeinated at 9:28 PM in d10

Thursday, 13 August 2009

WFRP 3 Discussion at Grognardia

James M. and regular readers of Grognardia are having a great discussion about the Warhammer Fantasy Role Play (3|4)e announcement at WFRP News.

Of course, you're invited to comment here as well.

Posted by caffeinated at 1:59 PM in d10

WFRP 3 Announced at GenCon, Critical Fail.

Rumors become Fact.

McNeill indeed played WFRP (3|4)e1.

FFG has decided to bring the MMORPG play style of D&D 4e to our game.

Yes, I used "our game." FFG cannot expect a fan base like those that have nurtured, actively or passively, WFRP from 1e to 2e, through many publishers and licensees, to be excited about (3|4)e. I believe will not be well received in the community. And at $99.00USD, it's priced out of most "comers" to WFRP.

Let's look at that rationally. Putting myself into a D&D 4e players shoes (phewww!), I've invested at least the same amount of money for, it currently appears, a minimum of 4 books. I'm playing in an active campaign with 4 others and a DM. That's $500.00USD around the table!

Now, I have to convince others to do it again?

FFG is investing poorly here. IMHO.

WFRP (3|4)e has the look of a game with a high production cost. But it is not Pathfinder and it is not D&D. Paizo recently announced a huge success with the Pathfinder release. It makes sense, Pathfinder has a built-in market for players of D&D 3.5e with a release that has been dubbed 3.6, 3.75, even 3.9 release.

And Paizo playtested the hell out of Pathfinder PUBLICLY with FREE alpha and beta releases!

I said it here, to quote myself, "FFG is so excited about [WFRP (3|4)e], they are forgetting to talk to the buyers. When the internal focus groups are earning the dollar, the groups can become "'Yes' echoes." If internally—and folks like Graham McNeill count—all you have is people repeating your own belief of success, you may just believe you cannot fail."

FFG might have a Critical Fail on their hands. How would that be represented on the fancy dice of WFRP (3|4)e: a steaming dog pile?

meta-footnote-1=This is my way of using a regular expression to say: is WFRP 3 really just '4e' in a different box?
Posted by caffeinated at 12:34 PM in d10