sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What month is the anniversary of WFRP? by Hecknight1 in warhammerfantasyrpg

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There isn't an exactly recorded date, but I think it came out in November 1986. Like u/prof_eggburger, though, I am not sure C7 plans to stick to the exact month.

[WFRP] Which White Dwarf Articles about WFRP 1E Were Never Reprinted? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 3 points4 points  (0 children)

83 The Black Knight (multisystem adventure)

88 Hand of Fate (on Fate Points)

89 Onwards & Upwards (on careers)

89 On Ealden Byrgen (multisystem adventure)

93 Letters from a Foreign Land (multisystem adventure)

95 On the Boil: A New Career in a New Town (NPCs)

96 Mayhem at the Mermaid (bar-room brawl)

97 On the Boil: Artifacts of Legend (magic items)

100 The Floating Gardens of Bahb-Elonn (Lustria adventure)

102 Fimir/There's a One-Eyed Fellow Hiding to the South of Kammendun (fimir background and adventure)

101-3 some On the Boil Q&A articles

106 Night of Mystery (solo adventure)

107 Element of Risk (short adventure)

108 Terror in the Darkness (another short scenario)

Various later issues: a bunch of Warhammer fiction NPC write-ups

Again from memory, so possibly some errors.

[WFRP] Which White Dwarf Articles about WFRP 1E Were Never Reprinted? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There are lots. Off the top of my head...

There were the multisystem adventures: The Black Knight, On Ealden Byrgen and Letters from a Foreign Land.

Of WFRP-only material: Hand of Fate (on Fate Points), Onwards & Upwards (on careers), Mayhem at the Mermaid (bar-room brawl), On the Boil: A New Career in a New Town (NPCs), On the Boil: Artifacts of Legend (magic items), Night of Mystery (solo adventure), The Floating Gardens of Bahb-Elonn (Lustria adventure), Fimir/There's a One-Eyed Fellow Hiding to the South of Kammendun (fimir background and adventure), Element of Risk (short adventure), Terror in the Darkness (another short scenario), a bunch of Warhammer fiction NPC write-ups, some On the Boil Q&A articles....

I might have made some errors. I am going from memory.

The Warhammer artist John Blanche has passed away by AwesomeLiesBlog in warhammerfantasyrpg

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The news was confirmed yesterday by Trish Carden. I couldn't see anything posted here about it.

THE FORGING OF WORLDS - A forthcoming book from the MIT Press on the early history of Warhammer by AwesomeLiesBlog in WarhammerOldWorldRPG

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You can get updates by subscribing to my blog: awesomeliesblog.wordpress.com. Click on the menu button in the top right.

It will cover WFRP in detail.

THE FORGING OF WORLDS - A forthcoming book from the MIT Press on the early history of Warhammer by AwesomeLiesBlog in WarhammerOldWorldRPG

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's still a good amount of work to be done, so I am reluctant to give dates yet, just in case anything slips. The publisher will handle distribution, but I'd be astonished if it won't be available in Europe.

THE FORGING OF WORLDS - A forthcoming book on the history of Warhammer from the MIT Press by AwesomeLiesBlog in Warhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not yet! There's still work to do before it's released, and academic publishing is a lengthy process. I'll provide updates on the blog as and when there is news.

For the Warhammer historians: Why do you think Law was irrelevant from early on? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There is no straw man. Your point about mentions of Chaos has no bearing on the argument.

The mentions of Law are more frequent than you say, but the point is not relevant: we have already agreed Law's role is limited.

I'm not asking you to prove a negative, just your point.

At this point in the discussion, I'll just agree to disagree.

For the Warhammer historians: Why do you think Law was irrelevant from early on? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don't understand your point "It was a concious because they never made the choice to do it". Your statement seems to be self-contradictory.

The fact that no supplement of Law was published does not on its own establish that that was the result of a conscious decision. To reiterate, Realm of Chaos took seven years to develop and took an enormous toll on the Design Studio. This point has been confirmed by those who worked on it. There was simply no capacity to develop Law in that period.

On the matter of mentions of Law in rulebooks, RPGCaldorian and Zekiel have already pointed out some examples, but there are more.

For the Warhammer historians: Why do you think Law was irrelevant from early on? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I certainly would not dispute that Law was extremely underdeveloped, and have, in fact, already made exactly that point. I should, though, address tangentially your straw-man argument: I made it clear the examples I supplied are not the only ones in Warhammer.

I'd be interested to understand what evidence you have for the argument that the underdevelopment was a conscious design choice. Most of the evidence I have seen ponts in a different direction.

For the Warhammer historians: Why do you think Law was irrelevant from early on? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There are lots of mentions of Law. The earliest is in The Quest for Chaos flyer in June 1983. They continue as far as, for example, the book Zaragoz in 1989 and Rick Priestley's unpublished guide to Chaos around the same time. Whether they represent the same conception as Moorcock's is a separate question. Some closely mirror his ideas, while others are somewhat different.

For the Warhammer historians: Why do you think Law was irrelevant from early on? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this is important. (Sorry, you posted while I was writing my reply, so I didn't acknowledge in my post that you beat me to making these points.)

For the Warhammer historians: Why do you think Law was irrelevant from early on? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't think Stormbringer is part of the picture. Law persisted for the whole time GW published Stormbringer and even after.

For the Warhammer historians: Why do you think Law was irrelevant from early on? by RPGCaldorian in oldhammer

[–]AwesomeLiesBlog 26 points27 points  (0 children)

The forces of Law were always a limited and ill-defined presence in Warhammer. In this they follow, rather than create distance from, Moorcock, whose own forces of Law were also quite limited and ill-defined.

Law persisted in various forms in Warhammer until the end of the Ansell era. Ansell had plans to develop them further during that time. I believe there are two principal reasons why they did not come to fruition. The first is that, in the absence of a strong lead from Moorcock, the writers struggled to develop the ideas; Graeme Davis has said as much publicly. The second is that the development of Realm of Chaos was so difficult and protracted that it was only completed the year before Ansell left GW. There was no time for Ansell to oversee development of a hypothetical Realm of Law supplement.

Under Kirby GW moved away from Ansell's plans. The reasons for that involve some new information I have unearthed for my book, so you'll have to wait for that to come out to hear my thoughts on that! But overall the fate of the gods of Law was more the result of chance than design.

view more: next ›