Who goes First? Initiative Talents in WFRP

One bugbear in WFRP is the clarity of explanations in the core book. Superficially the Rules As Written (RAW) seems fine until you start combining the text from many Talents and Skills, and also some of the situational modifiers. This post is all about who acts first, and how that might change with different circumstances. And then goes a little into changing the Fast Shot talent.

(aside – this is not a criticism of WFRP, as most games have issues with who acts first. I’ve written about the initiative and fast casting rules in Ars Magica on a number of occasions. Please take this post as a way to discuss unintended issues.)

As a basic premise, the Initiative Stat decides the order that characters act, the higher your stat the earlier you act. Makes good sense, and is one of the many reasons the I stat is valuable. The talent Combat Reflexes (WFRP core p.135, and is one of the best talents in the game) adds 10 each time it is taken to the characters Initiative order, but does not alter the basic stat.

e.g. five characters could be ordered as:

1. a Protagonist, with I: 40 = order 40
2. a Soldier, with I: 36 = order 36
3. a Duelist A, with I: 34 = order 34
4. a Duelist B, with I: 33 = order 33
5. a Hunter, with I: 32 = order 32

In the above example the order is clear from the Protagonist first through to the Hunter last. Then as the characters develop by spending xp on skills stats and talents, several factors could potentially change the order.

1. a Duelist A, with I: 34, using a weapon with the Fast quality = First.
2. a Hunter, with I: 32, using the Fast Shot talent = First, as well??
3. a Protagonist, with I: 40, and one rank of Combat Reflexes = order 50
4. a Soldier, with I: 36 = order 36
5. a Duelist B, with I: 33 = order 33

Now we have a dilemma – both the Fast weapon quality and the Fast Shot talent indicate the character acts outside of normal initiative; so who acts first? And consider the RAW to apply when resolving (a) two Fast weapons are used against each other, then the normal initiative takes precedence for those two combatants, and (b) the character with the higher number of Fast Shot talents goes first, and when the talent levels are equal they a simultaneous. Not great to have different ways to resolve conflicts.

Thankfully the Combat Reflexes talent is a good one, as it alters the order of initiative without introducing new special interrupts or first actions. This means the Soldier could advance their “I” stat, but is unlikely to catch-up to the Protagonist, who can buy a special talent.

YMMV but to me this indicates different approaches for resolving who attacks first, which might indicate that the Combat Reflexes talent is “stronger” than the weapon quality, and both are stronger than the base “I” stat. There is no clear rule on this in RAW though for Fast vs Fast Shot.

Rule Suggestion: To resolve this what-if scenario suggest that: the Fast weapon quality is considered equivalent to one level in a talent which grants a “act first” action, and that there should be one method for resolving all “act first” actions.

This means that Fast quality and Fast Shot (1) are “basically the same” initiative order, and then the characters “I” stat is then used to break any tie. If the I stat is equal then the actions happen simultaneously. That won’t happen often but does give a known mechanical way to say “it’s ok for these two things to happen at the same time”.

The probability of Fast Shot and the Fast quality being used in the same round is low anyway, but this makes it clear. This standardises the way to resolve any first/fast actions. It also keeps the benefit of buying the 2nd level talent to Fast Shot (2) which would exceed the Fast weapon quality, and given that investment of 300 xp, it seems reasonable.

The rationale for this is to make the use of any Fast talent or quality mechanically similar, and to also keep the value of increasing a character’s stats.

e.g.

1. a Duelist A, with I: 34, using a weapon with the Fast quality = First, at 34.
2. a Hunter, with I: 32, using the Fast Shot talent = First, at 32.
3. a Protagonist, with I: 40, and one rank of Combat Reflexes = order 50.
4. a Soldier, with I: 36 = order 36.
5. a Duelist B, with I: 33 = order 33.

The Hunter could take an additional level of Fast Shot and move up the order, or also invest in their I stats to likewise react first. The Duelist B likewise could use a Fast weapon and move past the Soldier and Protagonist.

Alternate Simple Suggestion: the Talents are always faster. The core principal here is that while a weapon may have a quality that makes it quick, training (through spending xp) makes a person faster. It keeps the value of character choices higher than equipment.

Therefore in the order above the Hunter and the Duellist would switch positions of 1 and 2.

Side Discussion: Fast Shot needs to be changed! It’s a mess.

As written the talent Fast Shot seems to be allowing a shot in a subsequent round with little clarity on how that action works. It raises some confusing caveats for preloaded weapons, and not being able to move. For example it is not clear if Fast Shot can be used with different types of weapons, or if the weapons need to be in hand, or just on the characters body.

• Is a throwing knife in hand valid for Fast Shot? (Yes).
• Is there a penalty if a character is holding a pistol in each hand and fires one, and then wishes to switch hands the next round…is switching hands too slow? (Not in raw).
• Are bows excluded because they have no reload? (No, bows can use fast shot as normal).
• It’s not even clear to me when a player should declare they are using fast shot – because the group need to know but does the character have a normal action in round 1, and then declare they will be shooting quickly in round 2 at the end of everyone else’s turn?
• Instead suggest:

Fast Shot (Max Agi bonus), Test: any ranged attack using this talent.

You are a skilled marksman who is able to attack with lightning speed. At the start of any new turn you may choose to make an attack with a ranged weapon outside the normal initiative order. Roll to hit as normal for the ranged attack. The weapon must be ready to use, loaded (if required), and readily available. When using Fast Shot you forfeit your attack and move actions, but may defend as normal.

Aside Discussion: Drawing and Changing weapons.

There are no mods for speed or attack for changing weapons mid fight – we know drawing a weapon is a free action (pg 158), but there might be a bit of mechanics applied for groups who want more crunchy mechanics.

• Rule: Readying or changing weapons causes a -20 Initiative penalty. The character can still act, but they are less prepared than normal.
• Offset by gear: a bandoleer or special sheath or holster reduces this penalty by 10.
• Offset by talent: each level of Fast Hands reduces this penalty by 10.

At the start a fair duel both combatants would know not only the rules but would have time to be ready. Unfortunately many fights start with less favourable conditions and characters might be caught unprepared. A character who is caught without a weapon plausibly has a disadvantage, although they should be balanced against weapons which are typically worn to be used.

To represent this disadvantage without getting stuck too far into simulationist game mechanics – a character who is unarmed and is already within melee range at the start of a round either:

• Must defend with Dodge or Melee Unarmed (as normal), and/or
• If the character chooses to ready a weapon they suffer a -20 penalty to their initiative – as they forego part of their response speed to adjust for gaining the weapon. The weapon can then be used to defend.
• Drawing and readying a weapon in each hand is also possible, but increases the initiative penalty to -30.

As each combat round is meant to be a fluid and changing encounter this represents that the character can be seen preparing a weapon which an opponent would react to, but not necessarily be able to mitigate. Like normal the character can continue to use whichever defence to attacks they wish, such as Dodge, but may opt to forego speed for their preference.

Changing weapons is the same as drawing a weapon.

E.g. A cunning thief is armed with a dagger in their main hand and a throwing knife in their off hand has dispatched his last melee opponent, and now chooses to switch the throwing knife to his main hand. This invoked a -20 initiative penalty as the thief stows the dagger and changes the knife to his main hand.

Likewise a character brandishing two pistols might opt to fire one each round, but the second round they are slower due to switching hands.

Gear and talent explanations: Bandoleers, Lines, and Holsters were designed to keep weapons at hand. It is arguable if quick access equipment was really a thing in the old world, but it is flavoursome. There are references to pirates using pistols on lines so they could drop them without breaking or missing them.

Option: Delay.

A character may delay their action in a round until after somebody else does something, this does not forgo their action if it doesn’t occur, but allows them to wait.

E.g. a cutpurse assists his friend by throwing a weapon to her, but must wait till that friend is ready. The cutpurse’s action for the round is delayed.

Option: Overwatch.

A character may opt to watch a space and await the opportunity to strike or attack – this is similar to aiming. It must be plausible for the area to be covered by the pending action, and if so the character gains a +10 bonus to attack anything that enters that area.

E.g. a guardsman stands aside a doorway concealed, waiting his opportunity to strike against a cutpurse he suspects is robbing a manor house. The guardsman does not strike out against fellow guards as they patrol, but does gain a +10 to attack against the cutpurse when he moves cautiously through the door.

Happy gaming.

Changing Feint in WFRP 4e

While I like WFRP 4e, the Feint talent isn’t well designed, and in my opinion not worth taking. To fix this I suggest it is updated to:

Feint – Max: Weapon Skill Bonus, Tests: Melee (Any) for Feint attempts

You have trained how to make false attacks in close combat to fool your opponent. By forgoing your move action you may now make a Feint against any opponent using a weapon. This is resolved with an Opposed Melee (Any) / Intuition Test. If you win, you attack the same opponent again in current round, and add the SL of your Feint to your attack roll. Note that a successful Feint does not increase the attackers advantage, however a failed feint test will cause a loss of advantage (as normal).

…Alternatively

In low Advantage games where it is capped by IB or even limited to +1 Adv; or if it’s preferred then the opposed Feint test is used normally and applies or removes advantage as normal but does not add its SL to the actual attack.

When used this way a feint becomes a way for an attacker to gain advantage and remove the opponents, but does not heavily swing the combat with the SLs applying to the next roll.

…Why?

• Feint shouldn’t be restricted to Fencing weapons. Anyone with any weapon can try to feint.
• I dislike having actions which cross over into the next round.
• the “cost” of movement means that an attacker needs to make a strategic choice; sometimes missing the opportunity to move will be a significant disadvantage. When two skilled Feinters fight you might see huge amounts of attempts to feint.
• It should be possible for both sides to feint each other.

…But?

• Wont combatants often feint when they can? Well yes. It is a valid combat tactic used regularly.
• This adds an extra resolution to many attack actions, which makes combat slower! Yes, I agree that its not desirable, but it is a special kind of talent likely only used by specialist characters. Conversely some move actions also require a test, so mileage will vary. At present nobody takes the talent.

Ref: Long Shadow Games inspired this post by creating their own rules for Feint in WFRP 4e. Kudos and credit. https://longshadowgames.com/2020/12/31/fixing-feint-in-wfrp-4e/

Stained Glass images of the Gods of Warhammer Fantasy

An artwork post again, showing some of the gods of the old world as they might be depicted by artisans in the setting. See all the gods here.

Perhaps have a look at Range…combine Sling and Thrown, and fix Bolas

When I read the WFRP rules for Melee (Parry) and Melee (Fencing) weapons it seemed to me to be a split that wasn’t logical; so suggested combining them. Now I’m looking at the difference between Range (Sling) and Range (Thrown) as they seem very similar. What is the need for two skills? How often are these skills taken that they should be separate?

If the argument is about how they work and are used then I can’t see how learning to throw a rock and an axe are overly similar.

And also tell me why Bolas are in Range (Thrown) but not Range (Entangling). Crikey. Maybe the shift should be to move Bolas to Entangling instead? And add Sling while you’re at it… So we’d have:

• Range (Throwing) with everything currently there except bolas, and
• Range (Entangling) with what it has now, plus both Slings, plus Bolas.

Suggesting a house rule to combine them, as I doubt either gets much use outside of niche characters and it seems an arbitrary separation. Worth considering at any Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay group table.

Warhammer Fantasy Character Artwork

TTRPG images for WFRP and others

I’ve played in games with various themes, and some of these images are seeking to reflect those themes and tones; and others are just here to be shared.

Warhammer Fantasy Artwork using Midjourney AI

Starting with some skaven,

then onto some some mountain scenery,

and some random,

Need a bigger boat…quick review of Sea of Claws by C7 for WFRP

In short – Sea of Claws is a great book. Well worth the pdf.

Our group was running a pirate & oceanic style game for many sessions and while its all doable with a little imagination and hand waving, this book gives solid anchors (ahem) for GMs and lots of reading material for both players and GMs.

Beasties, lore, ship combat and construction rules, weather, new careers. Plenty of information on the gods appropriate to the seas which makes all the difference in niche details … and lastly you don’t want to meet that creature on the cover; deadly fun.

What does an AI think Bright Wizards look like? MidJourney for rpgs

Portrait of a WFRP Bright Wizard, as generated by the MidJourney AI

By now the AI image generation tool MidJourney is probably old news (relative to its beta), but its darn interesting news. The tool facilitates textual prompts to create images. I’ve recently used it to create a character portrait, and seen some far more amazing art created for gaming purposes. Its an all new rabbit hole to investigate, and one that I think will develop into a staggeringly good tool.

I can see this as a service that could be commercialised well, provide a depth to users, and demonstrate how AI can be productive and effective to a wide audience. And now some more nightmare fuel…

Discussing Chain Attack again, and rewriting it as Chain Strike

Recently I compared Chain Attack and Bolt in a prior blog post; surmising Bolt was basically in all ways superior. I should have made it clear that Blast was part of that comparison – have a read if you like.

However in the last few weeks the Winds of Magic WFRP book was released with new Overcasting and Magic Missile rules which significantly nurfed the extending of spells and the damage output of spells (yeah yeah, boo hiss) among other changes.

I’ve yet to see any justification or explanation for the nurf, and feel it changes magic for the worse. Perhaps that’s a post for another time. Grumble.

So do the changes make Chain Attack any better? A little, but not really. Here is why…

Chain Attack still is random in who is strikes, and the spell still makes it far easier to strike at multiple opponents. The nurf to Overcasting actually makes Chain Attack superficially better multi-target spell than Bolt at low career levels, or when casting without Channeling despite the higher CN. That is a fair change – better because it allows slightly more reliable multi-target damage output. It does nothing to make it compete with Blast, which is still the go-to low CN damage spell.

Aside – Winds of Magic nurf of multi-target damage from Overcasting really comes to the front as a key factor for the reduction in damage output, as does how powerful the Wizard is. More on that later.

However when you then consider that Chain Attack in RAW also boosts the strikes onto additional target once the first target is reduced to zero wounds, and the nurf to Overcasting means that is this spell is also far less likely to cause enough damage to do that; because spells will generally do less damage overall – so Chain Attack becomes weaker overall. Sure you can strike a few people, but you’re less likely to strike many, and you will do less damage. … So the Overcasting changes means less chain attacks from the spell called Chain Attack, and the spell is randomly targeted and costs more than Blast to cast. It might strike more people, but the caster can’t control that. Just use Blast.

Bolt will do less damage overall now, but retains the ability to pick targets at will, not at random. As a Wizard the ability to pick targets accurately is important, so Chain Attack doesn’t compete.

So while the spell teases the potential to strike a few opponents concurrently, now it actually will do so less often. Which means Blast and/or Bolt are still better; subject to how much precision the Wizard needs. Again, boo hiss!

E.g. if the Wizard needs precise damage due to a wild melee, use Bolt. If AoE is needed use Blast. Chain Attack is a middle point that is slightly better than Bolt, but uncontrollable.

OK, but how could the spell be made better? Well with a new version that grants the potential for more damage output. Why else are you even considering this spell.

Chain Strike

CN: 6, Range: WP Yards, Target: Special, Duration: Instant, Arcane

You strike out with a cascade of rupturing magic into your target, inflicting +4 damage as a magic missile to a selected target. For each +2 SL achieved in casting the spell may also chain to a new randomly selected target.

Additionally if the spell inflicts more than 2 wounds to the first target, the caster may also opt to strike an additional target, with the damage of each strike reducing by 2 each time a new target is struck. Each additional target must be within WPB yards of the last target struck, however each potential target may only be truck once. Thus it is possible to chain strike through many attackers if they are arranged optimally.

Firstly this change allows for a line of targets to be struck in sequence, providing a true “chain” attack. I see this as a major positive, with the RAW version requiring all targets within WPB of the first, which just does not happen often enough.

I deliberately added the specific randomness in the additional targets, excluding a repeat hit on a prior target to limit one casting ping-pong’ing between two foes standing next to each other. This change makes Chain Strike mostly the same when there are a lot of targets around. It also means that the spell is exceedingly risky to use on foes where your allies are present.

Secondly this new version retains the idea of the spell chaining to new targets, but allows this to happen if each target in the chain takes more than a trivial amount of damage, not what it inflicts, but what the target actually takes. This is important, because the spell should keep striking until it has used all it’s energy.

Thirdly this makes the spell inflict more damage than Bolt, but asks the Wizard to accept they cannot control where it randomly strikes and pay more (CN6 vs CN4) to cast it.

A Wizard who channels is likely to inflict 8+ damage with this spell (4 + WPB as a magic missile), and could perhaps “chain” into many opponents if they channel and/or if they roll well.

Last consideration is the damage output – it is moderate and in line with Amber Spear (beast spell) in terms of how multiple targets are handled. This version scales down to zero damage faster than the Amber Spear, and the spear is a higher CN.

Lets look at scenarios – the spell won’t regularly inflict more than approx 8-11 damage due to the new Winds of Magic Overcasting rules. That constrains huge bursts. It will however be likely to chain to at least one additional target, and slowly reduce its damage as it chains through many.

e.g. A Journeyman Wizard rolls well, achieving 4 SL on their Language Magick test after adjusting for CN:6. This spell then inflicts approx +9 damage, will chain to at least 3 targets, and might hurt up to 1-3 more those struck have poor Toughness and Armour.

So three targets take 9, and 1-3 more might take some additional damage. Useful, but not overly powerful when compared to using Blast on the same group. Blast might inflict the same 9 damage, and on a large group will hit far more targets.

e.g. The same Journeyman rolls poorly next time, just barely casting the spell with no additional SLs. They inflict the same base damage, and will still get the benefit of chaining to a few more targets, although far less than if they had rolled better, or channeled first. In this way the spell is still useful as a “chain themed spell”.

e.g. A Wizard Lord rolls well with channeling, and achieving 10 SL on their L:M test. This spell will chain to at least 6 targets, and will inflict a lot of additional random damage if enough targets are available.

A flaw and drawback in this redesign is the complexity of tracking how the spell jumps and the altering damage. I’ve seen and heard that magic makes games too unpredictable and harder to track – frankly that’s a valid view, that I don’t support at all.

Perhaps a tweak is needed to the original spell rather than a re-write, instead keeping how the original version arcs to new random targets for each 2 SL, and saying that is all the spell does, and also increase the damage to +6+SL? If so, don’t bother with the mechanics of additional strikes if the target drops to 0.

That way the spell damage output is boosted slightly, it’s perhaps more competitive with Bolt & Blast for output, and the spell os resolved quickly.

Hope all your rolls are critical successes.