Riddle of Steel...Any Good?

[Paka]

I am running The Riddle of Steel in the Midnight setting. It is a brutal and dangerous game but my players are managing to live through it just fine, using smarts and Spiritual Attributes to keep alive and still be heroes.

The link below is to my Story Hour. Check it out.

The game works great for long campaigns. I would argue that its Spiritual Attribute system makes long campaigns fantastic.

I've run combats with multiple opponents that were fast and dramatic and have run combats with non-human opponents that worked just fine.

Check it out.

 

[med stud]

There is one key word when it comes to battle in TRoS: Caution. Dont take a fair fight if you can avoid it, dont go against numbers unless you are absolutely sure that you are superior or have surprise on your side and try to start battles with an ambush. Following those rules you have a good chance of your character surviving.

My main problem is that the same works in reverse; a guild of assassins is the worst opponent you can have. A TPK is about six bad guys with crossbows in an ambush. This is countered pretty well by having a rogueish (in the D&D- sense of the word) character along who can spot ambushes and take precautions.

All in all, TRoS is the opposite of D&D in the mechanical sense. I think it is a refreshing change and a much better system for games focusing on intrigues and politics. It's not a system for people who like taking on armies and dragons and have the feeling of playing superior beings.

 

[Paka]

There is one key word when it comes to battle in TRoS: Caution.

I would like to point out that the game does promote daring, heroism, recklnessnes and such, but the risk is tremendous, the risk is death.

My players continually do daring things in the face of evil and danger. They take the risks because that is what heroes do.

I don't want TROS to be painted like a system that makes players tip toe around everything. The overwhelming them of the game is: What will you kill for?

It drills in to the players that they should only fight when it really matters but a good DM will make it matter in this game. It isn't fit for wandering encounter tables or random monsters but it is fit for heroism.

 

[Wombat]

The game does a wonderful job for depicting late Medieval/early Renaissance sword dueling; it is somewhat useful with other weapons, but still fine as long as things are one-on-one. One of the basic problems is, of course, that the combat is vastly deadly and healing is minimal -- this follows the notion of trying to be very realistic.

OTOH, the magic system is easy to munchkin. With just minimal starting point you can create a deadly magician that no swordsman can stand up to. The limit with magic is that it ages you if you do it wrong, but the game only marginally takes this into account, which seems very unrealistic, a very odd balance to the combat system.

I understand the notion that the passions/spiritual attributes are supposed to be both what draws you into a fight and also stops you from fighting, but again they are High Passions, more in line with Malory and other classical Arthurian writings (again rather unrealistic), but I'm not sure they do what they are supposed to do, as far as combat is concerned, at least in the long run. Admittedly, however, I have not run a campaign, only short scenarios, with the system.

One thing I find odd about the game is the combat. Let me explain: my basic theory is that you can determine what (in very broad and general terms) is supposed to take place in a game by the amount of room devouted to any given subject in the rule book. Combat takes up a very large section of TRoS, but combat is also excrutiatingly deadly. Most people who play this game tell me how the point of the game is to avoid combat (very non-heroic) while playing up one's Spiritual Attributes (which are very Heroic, in the Medieval and Victorian sense) -- to my eye, then, the game seems to work against itself. Is it intended to be a game of Great Passions and Mighty Duels or a game of Calculating Odds and Living To Fight Another Day? So I find the game rather schizophrenic in this regards.

That being said, I know many people who passionately love the game.

 

[Pyske]

I tried it and liked it. FYI, there is a quickstart and a combat simulator program on their website. The game is not perfect (by which I mean there are several minor areas I would house rule), but it is well done and certainly playable for campaigns.

. . . . . . . -- Eric

 

[kenjib]

Most people who play this game tell me how the point of the game is to avoid combat (very non-heroic) while playing up one's Spiritual Attributes (which are very Heroic, in the Medieval and Victorian sense) -- to my eye, then, the game seems to work against itself.

But those two points are opposed. You most need to avoid combat when you aren't playing up your spiritual attributes. When the story comes to a head your spiritual attributes can easily double your combat ability and turn you into a combat monster.

Is it intended to be a game of Great Passions and Mighty Duels or a game of Calculating Odds and Living To Fight Another Day? So I find the game rather schizophrenic in this regards.

The former, yes. The latter, only primarily if your character is risking his life doing things that don't matter to him - which is heavily discouraged (mechanically) in the game.

 

[Harri]

My players have grown to love TROS. Ironically I am creating a Michael Moorcock 'Eternal Champion' type of multiverse and using D&D as well as WFRP and the Chaosium Strormbringer books to flesh it out.

There is a kind of incredibly subtle but powerful influence on the game because of the mechanic of spiritual attributes. TROS is not just about combat by a long chalk. The player is developing his character on the basis of the drives motivating his character.

In the end it comes down to what type of game you wish to play. There is in my view a place for all types of game.

Regards

Harri

 

[deltadave]

TRoS emphasizes different aspects of roleplaying than D&D does. If players behave the same way they do in D&D they will die quickly and uselessly. The mechanics encourage players to pick their battles carefully (as stated above). No longer will characters be heedless of arrows, sword slashes and high falls... If you are after a more gritty, priority driven game then TRoS is for you.

As a new TRoS GM, I usually make characters one night then take the sheets home and mull over the SA's I see to generate a game plotline that involves everyone. I've found that this often leads me into exploring aspects of the campaign that I would never have considered otherwise. If there are any really problematic SA's then the player and I can discuss it directly during the intervening time.

 

[Broccli_Head]

TROS is amazing! It is a very elegant and deadly game system and the Spiritual Attributes helps the players to really think about their character and how to play them. It also helps the GM to create stories centered on the players and their characters not a "here's a cool dungeon, let's use it" approach.

Pakaon these boards introduced me to the game with his Riddle of Midnight thread.

I myself have started a HârnWorld game using the TROS rules...called The Riddle of Hârn..

 

[gevrin]

There's a common misconception that Riddleof Steel is a combat dominated game, after all it's what we all talk about. However there are actually @65 skills available to a character. Each is rated as a task number, roll a relevant attribute dice pool and each dice getting that number is a success. The more, the better the success level. The thing is, that's it. If we don't talk about it more, it's because it's fairly straightforward.

We harp on about combat because that's where TRoS differs from many other games. Others here have described the mechanics. I just want to add a note about the consequences for playing. For me it's all about making decisions.

Most games (from D&D to Earthdawn, Runequest to Harnmaster) promote player decision-making right up to the point of contact. Then suddenly we are on auto-pilot.

Roll (or check for pre-determined) initiative.
Say who the character will hit.
Roll to hit.
Roll damage (in some cases, roll for hit location).
Roll to parry (or await the effectiveness of your armour class).

Most games now offer a few combat option but these are usually tinkering around the edges, a bonus here in exchange for a minus there. Apart from saying who we will hit, the GM could do all this on computer and phone us later with the outcome (I've heard of one or two GMs that do!) I know I'm talking exteme cases but it's perfectly feasible.

If TRoS is different, it's because it forces the players to make choices at every stage, exactly as they would have to do in a real fight.

Normally one person hits each exchange. The declaration is simultaneous. Do you attempt to get in first and contest the initiative? If your opponent defends, you can try and hit. If they also try to hit, the fastest will go first (against an opponent who's trying to attack, and is not defending at all). If the person attacked first is still standing, they can hit back at the non-defending opponent. A risky choice. You can always opt to defend at first and try to wrest the initiative from your opponent.

If you're hitting, you decide where (hint, go for the weak armour points), whether with point, edge, or blunt, and most importantly how much of your effort are you going to put into the attack and how much are you going to hold back in case your opponent defends successfully and attacks back. This is where you split the dice pool; don't be fooled into thinking it's a guessing game, it's a deadly calculation of how much you are willing to risk to take down your opponent. You know how many dice you have available and can see how well armoured your opponent is, and will quickly learn how roughly how good they are (as you see how many dice they are committing to the fight). You have to choose.

Additionally while you have a set dice pool for longsword, for example, when fighting, you select one of a number of moves linked to that weapon (cuts, parries, counters, beats, etc.) which also have an influence on the outcome of each exchange.

Damage in the end comes from your attributes and the weapon used along with how well you succeeded in the attack and is rated by the number of dice lost from the pools for shock, pain and blood loss. It can be minor or catastrophic, but there aren't many games in which it's a valid tactic to hit your opponent for a moderate wound and then defend while they struggle and eventually collapse before you from blood loss. OK, I know that's not heroic but it's feasible.

The mad thing is that because the system all runs on the dice pools available and the dice added or subtracted to the pool according to the situation, the turnaround for each exchange is very quick. TRoS runs as quickly as D&D3E or Runequest and quicker than Earthdawn or Harnmaster.

The trick in TRoS is not to get onto a fight unless you are prepared to risk death. Spiritual attributes where appropriate add dice directly to the dice pool so a moderately good or injured character can turn into a fearsome warrior ("my name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!") The system is dangerous but it is survivable with thought and daring; and it is heroic in the real sense - you may be scared (of losing the character) but if something has to be done...

Anyway, that's my "note" on the difference that the choices in TRoS make to my gaming. YMMV as ever.

Dave