Difference between revisions of "The Riddle of Steel"

Latest revision as of 18:38, 6 January 2013

--Dieter the Bold 02:38, 5 January 2013 (MST) After finishing the second part of the scenario, I am inclined to give TRoS a further try in a campaign or multi-shot. I don't find the setting interesting, or particularly playable. I'd be inclined to try using TRoS for a WarHammer game, or some other fantasy setting.
--Jason 10:16, 6 January 2013 (MST)I feel the same way, for the most part. If I were to play this game again, I would want others who were interested in learning it, and we could have a session of nothing but mock combats and character gen.
Character Generation:
I like point-buy over random generation, and I do like the Priority system used here (and in WHFRP 3.0). I think things balance out
Skill Mechanics:
Things seem to be well-balanced here, although I would like to see a little more guidelines on which Attributes to use.
--Jason 10:16, 6 January 2013 (MST)I think this is the weakest part of the game, but it works out well enough.
Spiritual Attributes:
This is definitely a mechanic I like. Somewhat similar to Aspects in the Dresden Files RPG / FATE. I would like to either expand the number of Spiritual Attributes or edit their definitions a little. Based on the design of the characters in the one-shot and the definitions, they seem to lean too far towards needless drama-making, (eg., rp-ing debates about whose made-up religion is the right one), or towards a linear focus on completing a plot (must reach my one true passion). I'd like to give Spiritual Attributes a little more wiggle-room for their use without making them too easy to invoke.
--Jason 10:16, 6 January 2013 (MST)These make a real difference. I like them. In terms of the pregen characters, I think they made all that drama for the purpose of demonstrating how the system works and to make a one shot colorful and 'interesting'. I dont think we find that kind of bickering interesting, but it is something.
Magic System:
We didn't use this at all and I haven't even read that chapter. I'll have to look over it to see if it's something to bring along or to leave behind when porting mechanics to a different setting. Anyone else do some reading on it?
--Jason 10:16, 6 January 2013 (MST)I have read it, and I think it would be pretty sweet if you had a player who was creative and who spent time to learn how things work. It is very open ended and free form, and also very powerful.
Melee Combat:
This definitely got things down to "realistic", or at least very consequential maneuvering. Your choice of combat tactics had serious consequences. If everything was organized in a sane and accessible fashion, would people be interested enough in what this system offers to make use of it, or does it draw people too much out of the immersion in the game?

If it reached a smooth-to-play point, I'd be willing to try it out for another couple games. That seems like it'd be a project, though. --Peter

--Jason 10:16, 6 January 2013 (MST)I like many aspects of the melee combat, but we really need work on the pain points. After the game Dieter, Rumi and I had a discussion on some of the ideas, and I think one of the main issues we had was that it was Madisons first attempt at GMing. This is no knock on her, she did fine, but she does not have the 'feel' for when to just make a judgment and keep things flowing or keep struggling. This came up when Rumi was doing her attack on the spear and when Peter was doing the terrain roll, among others.
Missile Combat:
After playing a ranged-combat character, I can say that it is a boring option when it's always in melee combat. It just takes too long to have an effect. Does anyone know where the rules on movement in combat time are?

I think you move yards equal to your Move per round? So I guess, ideally, you'd start aiming your ranged weapon when the approaching enemy will get into your best range just when you hit maximum dice. Not that this game gives you ideal situations much. --Peter

--Jason 10:16, 6 January 2013 (MST)I feel like the missile combat will be great for things like ambushes. It would also be good if you placed your archers in a well defended or difficult to gain position. For instance, had the archers in our ambush stayed in the woods, and just volleyed us, we would have been sunk. In a way, this is how missile combat really works. It is not that effective when melee fighters close. We are just used to it being dealt with differently in other games.
--Dieter the Bold 17:38, 6 January 2013 (MST) I re-read the section and when you go into Combat Time, you're able to go your Move rate in feet per round. This makes much more sense. But proper ranged combat will still require a screening force to prevent the archer from being overrun and butchered. An average Move is 8, so a longbow at one range segment with arrows set up could get off 3 shots with 4 dice each before melee combat starts, or 1 shot at 10.

--Jason 10:16, 6 January 2013 (MST)More thoughts. I think the TRoS toolbox could be used if understood. One thing we came up with after the fact, is that when Rumi wanted to attack the spear, and she was kind of told that there wasnt a way to do that, there really was. The effect of what she was trying to do was to trap the opposing spear and draw the attacker in, so that either he has to release the spear or bear the brunt of an attack. This is just a Duck and Weave evasion. Even though it doesn't sound like that at first, the effects match: Its difficult to do, and when it succeeds you put the attacker at a serious disadvantage. The book is poorly organized, and things are not well laid out (like armor...HELLO), but a skeleton exists for something good.