Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wombat" data-source="post: 1098498" data-attributes="member: 8447">Riddle of Steel is absolutely fantastic for one thing -- a simple system for accuratley playing out High/Late Renaissance sword duels.For anything else, it is pretty well useless.I have a particular loathing for the magic system.  It is very easy to maximize your ability in magic, thus utterly overbalancing the game, without the withdrawn bookishness of Ars Magica -- wizards generally go around kicking patootie and taking names.  Their single limiting factor is that if they screw up magic they age.  Yawn.  If you are good enough you will never age significantly, thus the limit goes away.OTOH, it is wildly popular with people who want "realistic" (i.e. Very Bloody And Quite Serious, No We Mean It, You Will Probably Die) combat.  Unless you surrender fast, one or the other character in combat will never be able to fight again, period.  I mean EVER.  Even if you recover, you probably have deep wounds that would prevent you from ever picking up a sword again.  All this assumes that you are not dead, of course, which is far more likely.The combat system is deadly and realistic; the mitigating factor are the SAs (essentiall emotional traits) which are High Fantasy, Arthurian and Romantic in tone, thus creating a fantastic disconnect in the game.My apologies to other people who like this game.  Yes, I owned a copy.  Yes, I read it all the way through.  Yes, I did sample combats.  And finally, YES, I DID play it in a short (3 session) campaign run by someone who liked it.You are welcome to like it; I am welcome to loath it.</blockquote>

Verification