Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Bit of a surprise considering they just launched Old World RPG

https://cubicle7games.com/en_GB/blog/tag/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-fifth-edition

As Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay nears its 40th anniversary, the team behind the beloved RPG are celebrating the milestone with exciting news: the launch of a new edition. We sat down with Dominic McDowall and Dave Allen to talk about the system, what’s new in the upcoming release, and what players can look forward to next.

That's a bold move - GW are doing AoS and Old World at the same time; but its darn bold to run two Old World based RPG systems where its only 200ish years between them!

Also the Old World isn't even shipping until 2026

 Overread wrote:
That's a bold move - GW are doing AoS and Old World at the same time; but its darn bold to run two Old World based RPG systems where its only 200ish years between them!

Also the Old World isn't even shipping until 2026

To be fair to them, despite the by the standards of the IP meagre time difference TOW is portrayed quite differently to WFRP in terms of the background even after C7s, erm, "modernisations" in 4th. It's also a completely different play experience and one that hasn't exactly set the fanbase aflame with interest really, so reassuring people their main focus is still on the game almost everyone's playing seems sound. Not sure it needed a whole new edition so soon though.

4th seemed like a fan edition of 2nd that kept every idea they came up with, and no revision to trim stuff it didn't really need.

While there were some aspects of 2nd ed by GR/BI that could have used a little more detail or change in resolution, on the whole I thought its design was pretty cohesive and simple - for a percentile system at least.


I'm interested in seeing the dice pool of ToW and how it compares to WFRP. The way they use the % system results in issues and needless complexity, so anything that simplifies that within a similar design space would be good.

If their revision of 4th will look at removing some of the imo overly detailed components, that's a good thing.

I doubt they look at how they use the % system to resolve things, but if they did that even better. In a world where you've set a 0-100% chance of success, you can't just give a human a strength 70% of success without creating a huge set of modifiers.

IMO % are better when used to represent skills, rather than physical attributes. On an abstract scale your character has a 50% chance of succeeding at a smithing test, rather than 50% strength, which makes no sense when you compare a person to everything that exists in the world.

It looks like 5th Edition will keep the percentile system of its predecessors, though refining some of the excesses of 4th Ed.

Good of you like that system.

If Dice Pools are your thing then AoS Soulbound may be more your cup of tea.

I do wish we could get away from this notion that there's some kind of inviolate objective scale with complex/old/bad on one end and simple/new/good on the other. Games becoming simpler and less crunchy is not some glorious march of progress towards an inevitable perfect future, it's just change, arguably for its own sake which is never a good justification IMO.

 Overread wrote:
That's a bold move - GW are doing AoS and Old World at the same time; but its darn bold to run two Old World based RPG systems where its only 200ish years between them!

Also the Old World isn't even shipping until 2026

They did the same thing over on the 40k side announcing Imperium Maledictum a little over a year after they inherited Wrath and Glory which itself was only a year or two old at the time for its revamped totally-not-a-2nd-edition that was announced a year or two after the first edition's release.

I'm a little miffed they're calling it 5th Edition while also changing the setting in a relatively major way.

sadly main rpg books sell better than sourcebooks which sell better than adventures

so there is pressure to constantly re-invent the wheel and toss out new editions (they then get to re-issue updated versions of everything else too)

I saw a screen cap of a tweet stating that "CEO Dominic McDowall-Thomas promises fifth edition will be an evolution not a revolution of the familiar fourth edition rules and that backwards compatibility with current supplements is one of the key things the design team has prioritised."

That's got to be a good sign, right?

 KidCthulhu wrote:
I saw a screen cap of a tweet stating that "CEO Dominic McDowall-Thomas promises fifth edition will be an evolution not a revolution of the familiar fourth edition rules and that backwards compatibility with current supplements is one of the key things the design team has prioritised."

That's got to be a good sign, right?

Maybe?

Hopefully?

Sadly we heard similar from GW in term of Horus Heresy going from 2.0 to 3.0 and...

 His Master's Voice wrote:
I'm a little miffed they're calling it 5th Edition while also changing the setting in a relatively major way.

Wait what are the setting changes? I thought they were sticking with their "hodgepodge" pre-SoC-with-Oldhammer-flavouring version for WFRP and doing the TOW stuff in its own separate game? Are they changing the WFRP setting even more as well?

Maybe they'll just lay out the rulebook in an easier-to-read way; my annoyance is trying to find the bit that tells you what the copper/silver/gold wealth stat of a profession translates to in income, as it is not signposted clearly, amongst other things.

Also, maybe a base bestiary that has fewer big monsters - does WFRP need to have stats for Dragons, Griffons, Hypogryphs, Hydra and Manticores, Wraiths, Ghosts and Banshees, while throwing out just three Skaven profiles? By all means, put the big beasts in an expansion, but the base book requires more mooks than monsters.

Cover reveal



https://cubicle7games.com/en_EU/blog/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-fifth-edition-cover-reveal

For over 40 years, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay has provided gamers with a beloved setting of perilous adventure, grim investigation and deadly threats. The new edition of the game builds upon Cubicle 7’s award-winning fourth edition ruleset with improvements made to clarify and streamline rules informed by seven years of development and playtesting. We’ve designed the game with backwards compatibility in its very bones. Your treasured campaigns, classic tomes and favourite characters can return to the tabletop with renewed purpose.

Upgrade without fear as most of the old content material in the Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay catalogue can still be used with the new rules.

Five distinct Character types. Whilst most folk in the Old World are Human, they share their lands with stoic Dwarfs and garrulous Halflings, and receive visitors from the Wood Elf realms and High Elf kingdoms.

64 distinct careers, representing the way of life your Character follows when not adventuring.

A guide to the major religions of the Old World and the miracles performed by the Priests of these pantheons.

Spells from several different magical traditions.

A bestiary of foes, both common and scarce.

Advice on running games as a GM.

Streamlined rules for combat, pursuits, diseases and other perilous phenomena

64 is the same number of careers in the current book. 'streamlining combat' I can only translate as somehow fixing the advantage mechanic.

 Shakalooloo wrote:
64 is the same number of careers in the current book. 'streamlining combat' I can only translate as somehow fixing the advantage mechanic.

Yeah we ditched that element pretty quickly

 Mr Morden wrote:
Yeah we ditched that element pretty quickly

I get the intent: try to allow combat between two low WS fighters not devolve into them missing each other for round after round, but it my experience it ended up just one side that built it up and snowballed to a dominant position, especially if they outnumbered their opponents.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Yeah we ditched that element pretty quickly

I get the intent: try to allow combat between two low WS fighters not devolve into them missing each other for round after round, but it my experience it ended up just one side that built it up and snowballed to a dominant position, especially if they outnumbered their opponents.

Not to poopoo, but that kind of sounds like how a real fight would go. One side gains the advantage, builds on it and wins. Especially when outnumbering.

 Hellebore wrote:

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Yeah we ditched that element pretty quickly

I get the intent: try to allow combat between two low WS fighters not devolve into them missing each other for round after round, but it my experience it ended up just one side that built it up and snowballed to a dominant position, especially if they outnumbered their opponents.

Not to poopoo, but that kind of sounds like how a real fight would go. One side gains the advantage, builds on it and wins. Especially when outnumbering.

But not always very interesting in a game - it was also not explained well and got super complicated when you had people entering and leaving combat etc

Yeah, advantage just exponentially weighted the tide of combat to a ridiculous degree in my experience. The fight against the troll in the starter set? An utter joke.

Here's another interview with the designer that goes into more depth than the rather lacklustre one on C7's website:

https://www.wargamer.com/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay/fifth-edition-interview

 Shakalooloo wrote:
I get the intent: try to allow combat between two low WS fighters not devolve into them missing each other for round after round...

They already 'solved' that by having combat be an opposed test. So long as you fail less than your opponent, you still hit.
The group advantage system in Up in Arms was much better, since you had to spend it to get effects rather than stacking an ever-increasing bonus.
Other things my group has had issues with:
Variable XP costs to improve attributes and skills are hard for casual players to understand.
Fitting every single career into a totally symmetrical four-level structure with the same number of skills and talents for each one results in a few weird elements.
The noble career and noble blood talent seem like two different ways of handling the same thing, and they interact in confusing ways.
The mechanism of talents adding success levels to tests isn't very elegant, and levelled talents which do nothing more with higher levels seem both boring and a waste of XP.
Having to advance all your advanceable characteristics to complete a career gives little flexibility in character progression. Having to advance all eight available skills for level one careers is even more restrictive! Why does every single soldier have to be able to play a musical instrument, for example?
Many skills are notably less useful than others. Notably, Art is usually only good if you took something like drawing, Entertain, Perform, and Play don't need to be three separate skills, nor do Animal Care, Animal Training, and Charm Animal, Languages are good to take the minimum number of advances in but not worth advancing.
Some talents are pretty bad deals. Doomed is especially problematic.
The money system is a mess. While the coinage adds some flavour, the prices of goods are all over the place and the rules for losing money between adventures don't work especially well.

 Perfect Organism wrote:

 Shakalooloo wrote:
I get the intent: try to allow combat between two low WS fighters not devolve into them missing each other for round after round...

They already 'solved' that by having combat be an opposed test. So long as you fail less than your opponent, you still hit.

Yeah, they really went overkill on solving a problem by inventing two new mechanics to solve it at once!

 YodhrinsForge wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
I'm a little miffed they're calling it 5th Edition while also changing the setting in a relatively major way.

Wait what are the setting changes? I thought they were sticking with their "hodgepodge" pre-SoC-with-Oldhammer-flavouring version for WFRP and doing the TOW stuff in its own separate game? Are they changing the WFRP setting even more as well?

They're not changing anything. It's the same setting as 4e (so that is very broadly 8e WHFB) with all the previous source/campaign books remaining valid and usable.

I can only assume the OP you were responding to was getting confused with the fact that they are also producing the TOW system. C7 seem to think they can differentiate the two lines enough and their TOW stuff seems to be going for a more accessible, more colourful less dark vibe but I remain to be convined whether they'll suceed commercially with it.

 Londinium wrote:
C7 seem to think they can differentiate the two lines enough and their TOW stuff seems to be going for a more accessible, more colourful less dark vibe but I remain to be convined whether they'll suceed commercially with it.

If they're sticking with GW's 'vision' for TOW setting, it'll be a Warhammer Fantasy with neither Skaven nor Daemons in it. At that point, why even bother?