Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay - 2e vs 4e

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

Marktplatz

Gentleman
Joined
Mar 18, 2018
Messages
71
Reaction score
169
I've played both editions, but neither of them for long enough to really get a feel for which is better.

4e's got a lot of improvements in things I found flawed in 2e - the economic side of things as well as weapon balance is infinitely better.

That said, the 4e book is pretty fiddly and poorly organized, with rules and optional rules and sidebars everywhere that make it hard to find what you need, and even then the rules aren't always explained very well. A difference is made between Walking, Running, and Sprinting, but what that difference is is never explained, for example. 2e was, by comparison, fairly straightforward.

I'm planning to start a WFRP game soon, and I'm wondering what any of you (more experienced) guys think about the two editions and how they stack up against each other.
 
4E chooses to re-organise the Career system into tiers, which consolidates them to a degree, and there is a return to 1st edition style Classes too (although they aren’t prescriptive as much as D&D). They present skills as their own scores, still based on the Characteristic bar but allowing for Advancement customization. The characters, as a result, look more similar to RuneQuest than before. Combat has more tweaks in it - the rest seems very familiar and the physical quality of the book is top notch. I have started collecting the new Enemy Within Campaign books - of which there are lots coming - which is the key to really enjoying the game as a distinct fantasy game for me.

So, I think the new edition is fine and I wouldn’t look back. 2nd edition was good for its time, and was well supported, but the one thing they never did was adapt it for the Enemy Within Campaign.
 
Last edited:
I find 2e to be better by quite a way to 4e. 2e is a solid ruleset that has stood the test of time. 4e is too fiddly and it breaks more than it fixes.
 
Last edited:
I’ll just elaborate on the point I alluded to in my earlier post, as a criticism of 2e.

The point being that, for me, what makes WFRP distinct as a fantasy game is the Enemy Within Campaign. I would cite also the unique Careers system in character generation as well, because it’s diversity of character careers fully illustrated a whole society in a way that few other RPGs certainly did on its original release. However, it is the Enemy Within Campaign that really makes the world come alive - complete with all the British black humour, in jokes, and subversion of fantasy tropes throughout. It's also a really good story told in five quite varied parts - and with the capacity to integrate other adventures into it, it is possible to play it for years.

1st edition didn’t, in my view, ever match the Enemy Within Campaign with any other publication they made with the possible exception of Marienburg - which never got fully developed. The stuff they did with the Doomstones campaign and the like was generic as hell - and totally missed the mark when it came to the strengths of the game. That is, playing ordinary people in an advanced timeline and more urbanized setting from recognisable Tolkien-esque fantasy tropes, and then finding out the world was more akin to a Lovecraftian nightmare. The 1E system was messy - mostly a hybrid of ideas from RuneQuest (general percentile rules) and Traveller (the careers system) with a formatted approach to a Characteristic toolbar. The sorcery system wasn’t developed until much later through Hogshead’s belated Reams of Sorcery supplement - and wasn’t especially interesting till then. However, the system kinda worked enough to enjoy the story unfolding in Enemy Within Campaign and that is what mattered when you played it.

When Black Industries/Green Ronin made the 2nd edition, I think what they made was the best fantasy system on the market during that time. The book had fully professional and full colour production values, and it tidied up the rules fully to where it became a great engine as long as you didn’t mind the so called ‘whiff factor’ (missing your rolls a lot) of playing sometimes incompetent characters from time to time (which actually was befitting to the tone of the game, in my view). It had great support too - with lots of supplements and free online adventures and support. It was actually one of the games that, I think, worried Wizards of the Coast for rivaling D&D3E. Indeed, I remember an article written by Ryan Dancy bemoaning the fact that they hadn’t chosen to go the D20 route with WFRP. In it, he pointed out how easy it was to convert WFRP2E to D20 rules - and I think this is true. If you look at the way combat works, for example, it basically works with the same structure that D&D does.

Now, I didn’t really buy into D&D3 when it came out, and certainly not D&D4 - so WFRP2E was actually quite useful for me throughout the 2000s as a goto fantasy rpg system. I dabbled a bit with Castles & Crusades and latterly Mongoose’s RuneQuest (although that only became good when Loz & Pete took over the 2nd edition). Obviously, when WFRP3E came out with its big box of crap, I moved on anyway.

However, eventually D&D5E came out a decade later and that is now my goto fantasy game. Indeed, there is nothing stopping you from playing a general sort of spiky, dark fantasy in the mold of WFRP using 5E. Green Ronin’s Freeport setting is quite similar - and you could adapt a number of WFRP2E scenarios to that if you wanted. Indeed, if I just want to play spiky fantasy without the whiff factor, I could just play Savage Worlds. I look at WFRP2E in the light of other systems like that because it's just the system that sells it for me these days.

However, for me, what WFRP4E is trying to do is go back to the 1st Edition - with tidied up mechanics and a “Director’s Cut’ remastering of the original game. It isn’t useful as a general fantasy system in the way 2nd Edition is, but it really builds on the development of the Enemy Within Campaign in a way that is really compelling. As such, I don’t think you can really appreciate the game until you dive full heartedly into what they are doing with the campaign books too.
 
Last edited:
The 1E system was messy - mostly a hybrid of ideas from RuneQuest (general percentile rules) and Traveller (the careers system) with a formatted approach to a Characteristic toolbar. The sorcery system wasn’t developed until much later through Hogshead’s belated Reams of Sorcery supplement - and wasn’t especially interesting till then.
As an aside, that mixing of two of my all-time favourites is part of why I like Warhammer:thumbsup:.
 
WFRP2 appeals to me the most because I’m a sucker for the Career system, and WFRP4’s tiered careers feel so much like a regular class/level system. And skill advancements feel unnecessarily granular.

Worth checking out Zweihander as well, it specifically addresses the issues many has with 2e. You may like 4e better at the end of the day, but I've heard several people say that their ideal WFRP game would draw from both WFRP 4e and Zweihander.

If I had the time I’d write my own WFRP simulacrum and it would be a patchwork of WFRP2 and Zweihänder.

Zweihänder has some lovely ideas but feels overwritten and in fact overdesigned as all hell, with some confusing bits (the weapons table gives me a headache) and of course, the author is... complicated.


Yes, Mr. Witch Hunter, this post right here.
 
WFRP2 appeals to me the most because I’m a sucker for the Career system, and WFRP4’s tiered careers feel so much like a regular class/level system. And skill advancements feel unnecessarily granular.



If I had the time I’d write my own WFRP simulacrum and it would be a patchwork of WFRP2 and Zweihänder.

Zweihänder has some lovely ideas but feels overwritten and in fact overdesigned as all hell, with some confusing bits (the weapons table gives me a headache) and of course, the author is... complicated.



Yes, Mr. Witch Hunter, this post right here.


Zweihander is overwritten and poorly edited. The author has admitted that. This may have been addressed (the editing, anyway) in subsequent printings, it certainly saw significant editorial improvement in the Players' handbook. This was Fox's first time writing a game, and though I like Zweihander, it shows.

Leaving aside peoples' feelings about him (I like him fine, though I may be in the minority here), Zweihander is obviously something that grew organically, among a group of people who had been gaming together for a long time. It seems that one of the designers' blind spots was not realizing that what had become second nature to them would not be so clear to the uninitiated. And, one could likewise argue that Zweihander includes too much. Since there is no explicit setting, its nearly 700-page length is nearly all usable game material. The book could have been a damn sight slimmer, and still felt like a complete game. Still and all, I won't complain about quantity in a product I like.

In the read-through I did of Zweihander, I likened it to an interview I had seen with a documentary filmmaker. He talked about how one of his films should have been shorter, but he was too attached to the material to be objective. And I think there's some of that going on with Zweihander. Especially when you consider that the material in Main Gauche and Dark Astral was originally intended for the main book (Dark Astral, anyway, I may be wrong about Main Gauche).

Still and all, the Zweihander core book is really all you need - or likely will ever need - to play it.

Not sure if this is exactly what you're referring to, but internalizing the Weapon Qualities and Actions was one of the bigger stumbling blocks in our group. I printed out cheet sheats for both and passed them around as a reference, but it definitely slowed things down a bit.

Keep in mind also, that I have no direct experience with WFRP. I've read some of the rules and supplements, but never played it. So, my perspective is gonna be different from someone who's played the OG. I have considered checking out WFRP, but since I have Zweihander, and I like it and am used to it, it's not really a priority. And conversion is not that big a deal. Love the Warhammer aesthetic, though.
 
Another option if you prefer rules lite is Warlock. It's very good with a real dedication to useable game content and supplements.

It's not set in the Warhammer world (it has its own setting) but it's inspired by it and would be remarkably easy to use for Warhammer if you wanted.
 
I went in expecting to only buy the core and now have absolutely everything for it and Warpstar.

As well as being a great game it's a joy to read. (Which I can't really say about Zweihander especially. It's overly dense and the humour doesn't appeal to me like the humour in classic Warhammer. That's very subjective, obviously. I did think there were some great bits in 4e for that).
 
I just a couple days ago finally got around to buying the core book, which I'm currently reading. I will almost assuredly go back and buy everything else for the line. It'll take me a while to finish reading it though, as I'm also reading UVG, which is also bloody fantastic.

I don't know that i'll ever run Warlock out of the box, but I will probably steal a bunch of the stuff about careers to use in my own personal Black Hack hack. I'd like to get something that's maybe somewhere in between Warlock and Troika!. Maybe leaning more toward Warlock to start. Troika!'s level of weird can be a tough sell for a lot of people. We'll see though, if the rest of the Warlock line is as good I'll run it at least once just to see what it looks like out of the locker room.
 
Another option if you prefer rules lite is Warlock. It's very good with a real dedication to useable game content and supplements.

It's not set in the Warhammer world (it has its own setting) but it's inspired by it and would be remarkably easy to use for Warhammer if you wanted.


I've wondered if Warlock! would deliver a decent "grimdark" experience, given its minimalist approach. Its certainly tempting for a lazy DM (which I certainly am) to use such a clean, simple ruleset rather than one with lots of knobs and levers. At least for one-off games or short campIgns.

I went in expecting to only buy the core and now have absolutely everything for it and Warpstar.

As well as being a great game it's a joy to read. (Which I can't really say about Zweihander especially. It's overly dense and the humour doesn't appeal to me like the humour in classic Warhammer. That's very subjective, obviously. I did think there were some great bits in 4e for that).

Zweihänder definitely has more of an American CURRENT YEAR internet humor thing going on, compared to the dry, satirical British humour of WFRP.

I just a couple days ago finally got around to buying the core book, which I'm currently reading. I will almost assuredly go back and buy everything else for the line. It'll take me a while to finish reading it though, as I'm also reading UVG, which is also bloody fantastic.

I don't know that i'll ever run Warlock out of the box, but I will probably steal a bunch of the stuff about careers to use in my own personal Black Hack hack. I'd like to get something that's maybe somewhere in between Warlock and Troika!. Maybe leaning more toward Warlock to start. Troika!'s level of weird can be a tough sell for a lot of people. We'll see though, if the rest of the Warlock line is as good I'll run it at least once just to see what it looks like out of the locker room.

I bought Warlock! a couple of months back. Haven't gotten it to the table yet. Warpstar is on the way to me right now. My inclination is to buy all the stuffs for them both. My budget is to at least play them first and then reassess.

Edit: Troika! is something I'd like to run. I just got the hardback, not sure if my group will be game, but we'll see.
 
Last edited:
I've wondered if Warlock! would deliver a decent "grimdark" experience, given its minimalist approach. Its certainly tempting for a lazy DM (which I certainly am) to use such a clean, simple ruleset rather than one with lots of knobs and levers. At least for one-off games or short campIgns.

I bought Warlock! a couple of months back. Haven't gotten it to the table yet. Warpstar is on the way to me right now. My inclination is to buy all the stuffs for them both. My budget is to at least play them first and then reassess.
My general rule of thumb is that if I liked it enough to buy it its probably worth playing at least once. That said, I do buy stuff just to mine for mechanics and ideas, especially OSR stuff. Warlock looks pretty solid though, and as I mentione I'm also going to buy all the stuffs. I think the grimdark experience has more to do with the GM than the rules set though. I can do grimdark with a mechanic built on coin flips if I have to. :grin:
 
I think the grimdark experience has more to do with the GM than the rules set though. I can do grimdark with a mechanic built on coin flips if I have to. :grin:
It's a peculiar talent to have:thumbsup:!
 
I've wondered if Warlock! would deliver a decent "grimdark" experience, given its minimalist approach. Its certainly tempting for a lazy DM (which I certainly am) to use such a clean, simple ruleset rather than one with lots of knobs and levers. At least for one-off games or short campIgns.

I think so. Grimdark, especially in its earlier forms, is more about setting and tome. And Warlock's combat is pretty deadly which is one of the important mechanical things.

Zweihänder definitely has more of an American CURRENT YEAR internet humor thing going on, compared to the dry, satirical British humour of WFRP.

Although we should remember WFRP's humour wasn't all like that. Yes, there's the dry comments about the difference between normal nobles and vampire nobles being that the former are only metaphorical bloodsuckers. But there's also the fact that the halflings have a large cockeral on their coins, solely so they can make Carry On... style jokes about "big cocks".

I bought Warlock! a couple of months back. Haven't gotten it to the table yet. Warpstar is on the way to me right now. My inclination is to buy all the stuffs for them both. My budget is to at least play them first and then reassess.

They also seem to hit the sales frequently which is nice.

Edit: Troika! is something I'd like to run. I just got the hardback, not sure if my group will be game, but we'll see.
I like Troika! a lot as well. It's probably the best game for full on British gonzo out there.
 
However, for me, what WFRP4E is trying to do is go back to the 1st Edition - with tidied up mechanics and a “Director’s Cut’ remastering of the original game. It isn’t useful as a general fantasy system in the way 2nd Edition is, but it really builds on the development of the Enemy Within Campaign in a way that is really compelling. As such, I don’t think you can really appreciate the game until you dive full heartedly into what they are doing with the campaign books too.
If you don’t mind elaborating, in what ways do the WFRP 4e mechanics support the Enemy Within campaign?

I started collecting the 4e books and want to run the Enemy Within, but there’s some things I don’t like about the system. I was thinking about converting it, but it would be much less work not to.
 
If you don’t mind elaborating, in what ways do the WFRP 4e mechanics support the Enemy Within campaign?

I started collecting the 4e books and want to run the Enemy Within, but there’s some things I don’t like about the system. I was thinking about converting it, but it would be much less work not to.
They are separate points. The mechanics are tidied up directly from 1e as a source (ignoring what was done in 2e and 3e, respectively). I’ve yet to run the game, in all honesty, although I intend to when I finish off other game campaigns. I would probably mix and match some of the systems, myself, although I have rolled up a number of characters with the 4e system and on balance, like it a lot.

The Enemy Within Campaign has become a central focus for building up the 4e game setting through supplements, when it was largely ignored as a campaign in 2e and 3e*. That is what I mean, with the latter point. To me, WFRP really comes alive with the Enemy Within Campaign - without it, WFRP is just another fantasy RPG to me. So whatever the comparative merits of 2e, especially as a system, I prefer 4e because of it’s focus on The Enemy Within Campaign.

* I would note that 3e did make an 'Enemy Within Campaign’ supplemental box set, but it bore little resemblance to the original, from memory.
 
Last edited:
I think the Enemy Within Campaign defines WFRP because of the idea of “The Enemy Within”. 1st and 4th have this aesthetic. If you encounter Chaos, it’s mutants or a cult or beast men. Being centered around the Storm of Chaos, caused by Archaon the Prophet of Chaos Undivided and Herald of the Endtimes (no idea how many registered trademarks are in that sentence), 2nd and 3rd have a completely different aesthetic. It’s “Enemy Within“ vs. “Spiky Bitz”. It’s CoC vs. Cthulhutech. It’s Skaven being a shadowy whispered word that might get one sent to an Asylum or Burned at the Stake vs. the local Watch Sergeant having Skaven skulls for kneepads and Rat Ogre skulls for shoulderpads.

It’s not Green Ronin’s fault, they obviously had to deal with the WFB world in its then current incarnation, but that incarnation was shit, and only got worse as The Endtimes led to Age of Shitmar.

Since the Old World is dead now, WFRP can go back to the old aesthetic and not contradict anything. In a way, they’ve been freed from GW’s idiocy regarding the Old World...at least until GW brings it back.
 
It may seem superficial but I just can't get over 4e's fully colour art.

I love the black and white style art of the earlier Warhammer too much. It conveys so much of the setting.
 
I bought WH4E on the sale. Haven't read it in full, not to even mention running numbers...but I think it's a slight improvement over 2e. Whether an improvement was actually needed is another matter, of course!
 
It may seem superficial but I just can't get over 4e's fully colour art.

I love the black and white style art of the earlier Warhammer too much. It conveys so much of the setting.
I think the definitive Warhammer artist is John Blanche, but I think the black and white interior of the 1e was mainly down to budgetary constraints at the time, more than a desire to keep it that way. I mean, they had a full colour cover which was pretty iconic, and included some full colour 'plates’ inside, didn’t they?
 
I think the definitive Warhammer artist is John Blanche, but I think the black and white interior of the 1e was mainly down to budgetary constraints at the time, more than a desire to keep it that way. I mean, they had a full colour cover which was pretty iconic, and included some full colour 'plates’ inside, didn’t they?
To me Warhammer looks likes this.

b44ddc6115db68f947ed1c2da3ffc2cf.jpg
e072e9d849d9999131641bcf41e4aaac.jpg

Middenheim_streets.jpgmiddenheim_thoroughfare.jpgf46eecac3e5fc315921711279a9d5ee4.jpg
 

Attachments

  • e666eee4690c5278fb4e587c77ff7338.png
    e666eee4690c5278fb4e587c77ff7338.png
    595.3 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:
The cover is iconic, but to me its my least favourite piece of art. Other than the rats spilling of the ledges, it promises a different kind of fantasy than is in presented the book.
 
Ok.

I can't say I ever felt anything one way or another about that cover. What attracts me about Warhammer is the parts that aren't generic fantasy.
Well, having a Dwarf with a mohican was pretty novel at the time. But the point is, it wasn’t as if WFRP was trying to avoid full colour art for the purposes of tone. The black and white art was cool but the artists were only constrained for budgetary reasons.
 
Did you know....all the characters on that cover are direct representations of specific miniatures?
 
Well, having a Dwarf with a mohican was pretty novel at the time. But the point is, it wasn’t as if WFRP was trying to avoid full colour art for the purposes of tone. The black and white art was cool but the artists were only constrained for budgetary reasons.


Well, that' certainly wasn't the case with Ian Miller's art
 
Well, having a Dwarf with a mohican was pretty novel at the time. But the point is, it wasn’t as if WFRP was trying to avoid full colour art for the purposes of tone. The black and white art was cool but the artists were only constrained for budgetary reasons.
It's not just the colour. To me there was a clear style in the early Warhammer Art that really captured the griminess of the setting. I don't actually see much of that in the 1e cover. It's not that you couldn't do the same thing in colour. I feel that the Symbaroum art is along the right lines but a little too romantic perhaps. The 4e Warhammer art is just, I don't know too colourful, too bright,

warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-4e-starter-set.jpg
It's just lacks mood. It could easily be D&D.

This is somewhat better:
wfrp-4e-city.jpg

It at least looks like Warhammer, but it's a bit too soft, a bit too realistic, a lot of the earlier art was spikier, a bit more exagerrated, and the black and white style helped to catch that stylised exagerrated aspect of it.

Edit: And quite a lot of the art, especially Russ Nicholson's sketches capture the crowds and the sheer amount of people hustling and bustling, a setting full of ordinary people just trying to get through life, and your PC could step out from any one of them.

8c8a112f35a9962136b6abb7e19e53bc.jpg
The woman in the bottom left corner is trying to shake the dirt out of rug, (or something like that anyway.)
 
Last edited:
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top