David Gemmell... Anyone familiar with him?

[Thanaeon]

As the topic name says... Are you people familiar with the British fantasy author David Gemmell?

The reason I'm asking is because reading TRoS I couldn't help thinking every other page or so when reading it how TRoS would be just perfect for modelling his books... Something that I've found to be well-nigh impossible up to now.

The realistic and evocative combat system in itself is good for it, and goes a long way, but it's the SA's that really drive the point home. His books tend to have heroes that, while exceptional, are very much mortal and believable human beings, that get into the huge trouble because of what they believe in and generally, because of their feelings... It's these feelings, and their personal codes of philosophy, that give them the strength to pull through. (Bolding where emphasising TRoS aspects.)

Haven't yet had a chance to run the game, but I think I'll be running at least a one-shot within the next few weeks... If this game is as good as it seems (despite my complaints; see the newbie skill thread), I might start having trouble running any other games once I get started! :)

[Brian Leybourne]

Gemmel is a great author most of the time, and an average one some of the time, sadly. IMO anyway.

But if you're talking "King Beyond the Gate", and "Druss the Legend" et al, then I completely agree, you could have some fun times roleplaying there.

Brian.

[Bloodstryke]

"Druss the Legend" is a great match for TROS. It only begs one question.....

What are the stats for Snaga? : )

[Thanaeon]

But if you're talking "King Beyond the Gate", and "Druss the Legend" et al, then I completely agree, you could have some fun times roleplaying there.

Brian.

Talking about most of his production actually, and I was thinking more of the more sword-wielding characters. But yes, King Beyond the Gate and Legend are as good examples as any others.

Hmm... The slightly more modern setting of Ravenheart and Stormrider, played with The Riddle of Steel... I think I like that idea!

[Snikwas]

Great storyteller with a very readable style. His books suit TROS to a tee. The Sipstrassi Tales idea of someone who is Rolynd fits very well with the idea of the Riddle of Steel.

I'm a big fan of the Waylander series. The Drenai world would be a great setting for a TROS campaign. The Joinings could be fun to design, only beatable by someone powered up on SA's. Modelling the powers of the Source and Chaos would be a challenge. I'd be tempted to use them as a Senschenal driven plot device rather than allow them to be used by players. Keeps things a bit simpler then.

If you like sword-wielding characters you might have to tinker with weapon stats and create extra Proficiencies. The multitude of dual sword wielding characters using a variety of sword types means that Case of Rapiers,  Cut and Thrust etc might not be entirely appropriate. Furthermore, weapons like Short Sword might need its Parry TN reduced, given the ease with which Gemmell characters parry with them.

Just a few thoughts.

[Thanaeon]

I guess dual-wielding swords could be pretty closely related to both rapier case and sword and shield proficiencies. On the short swords... Now, I'm no expert, but I believe the high DTN is because its shortness makes it harder to use for blocking larger weapons of heavier strikes. Maybe give it a -1 against weapons that aren't that big. (Just mumbling here, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

And yes, I fully agree that Chaos and Source should be exclusively Seneschal elements in-game. I mean, they are gods, after all. You could also use Source guidance by using it like a Spiritual Attribute, maybe Faith, or maybe just Luck. Even Destiny might work. (In fact, now that I think of it, a Destiny would be a pretty good Source-introducing mechanic!)

[Snikwas]

And yes, I fully agree that Chaos and Source should be exclusively Seneschal elements in-game. I mean, they are gods, after all.

Thanaeon:

I don't mean to be nitpicky, but I meant the mystical powers that are usually attributed the Source and Chaos. For example, the actual powers of The Thirty, rather than its source. The power could be quite separate from the god. Gemmell never explicitly explains the link. It is the belief and perception of the individual. That aside, what I meant to say is I'm not sure how to model the powers of the Thirty, Miriel and others in TROS. The Sorcery rules are very different. For me, it would be easier to use them as a plot device or aid to the characters. For example, the Thirty offering their services to aid the characters in their quest or mission. The seneschal decides what the Thirty can and cannot do. I know it takes away potential character types, but unless someone can be bothered to create a system that would be the best solution. Probably.

You are right about Faith being very important. It often seems to create a zen-like quality in Gemmell's characters that allow them to achieve their goals. I'm thinking Decado and the Thirty in King Beyond the Gate and their attempt to turnback the Joinings. His doubts no longer matter and they got on with an impossible task, even at the cost of their lives.

I guess dual-wielding swords could be pretty closely related to both rapier case and sword and shield proficiencies. On the short swords... Now, I'm no expert, but I believe the high DTN is because its shortness makes it harder to use for blocking larger weapons of heavier strikes. Maybe give it a -1 against weapons that aren't that big. (Just mumbling here, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

I think you are on the right track here. No duel sword wielder is going to be much good at parrying Druss's axe, but against non-Mass weapons, perhaps they could have a modifier.[/i]

[Caz]

Part of the high DTN of a shortsword is also due to its shortness, less surface area to defend with (less margin for error), and vs. another quick little shortsword it would be no better, even with equal mass.

[Snikwas]

Part of the high DTN of a shortsword is also due to its shortness, less surface area to defend with (less margin for error), and vs. another quick little shortsword it would be no better, even with equal mass.

I agree with shortswords being more difficult to parry with. The point I am trying to make, is that the high DTN will not reflect the style of duels and characters that Gemmell is renowned for. Not many players interested in survival will design characters with duel swords when they'll get cut to pieces by a man with sword and shield. It might be realistic, but not true to many of the Gemmell characters. A large part of his popularity is that his stories are character driven. It would discourage players to design characters like Tenaka Khan, Decado, Culain, Angel, Rage, Senta, Tarantio/Dace etc.

[Thanaeon]

I don't mean to be nitpicky, but I meant the mystical powers that are usually attributed the Source and Chaos. For example, the actual powers of The Thirty, rather than its source. The power could be quite separate from the god. Gemmell never explicitly explains the link. It is the belief and perception of the individual. That aside, what I meant to say is I'm not sure how to model the powers of the Thirty, Miriel and others in TROS. The Sorcery rules are very different. For me, it would be easier to use them as a plot device or aid to the characters. For example, the Thirty offering their services to aid the characters in their quest or mission. The seneschal decides what the Thirty can and cannot do. I know it takes away potential character types, but unless someone can be bothered to create a system that would be the best solution. Probably.

Ah, yes, I understand now. Yes, I'd very likely use the Attuned (if that is the right word) of Chaos and Source as Seneschal plot devices. However, if I wanted to try to have a player play, say, one of the Thirty, I'd let them invest proficiencies in something like The Sight or something. I'd use it a bit like sorcery, though without aging rules. However, they'd have to split their dice pool between trying to see things, and being able to find their way back to their bodies. And I'd interpret the success pretty much the way I'd interpret a Perception roll - more things would give more, and more precise, information.

As for Temple... I'd really rather not get into that... I might prefer to play it diceless, or at least, only have the players roll indirectly for helping Temple.

You are right about Faith being very important. It often seems to create a zen-like quality in Gemmell's characters that allow them to achieve their goals. I'm thinking Decado and the Thirty in King Beyond the Gate and their attempt to turnback the Joinings. His doubts no longer matter and they got on with an impossible task, even at the cost of their lives.

Yeah, that's what I thought, too. Although to some, less religious, characters, Luck would seem to model the feeling better.

I think you are on the right track here. No duel sword wielder is going to be much good at parrying Druss's axe, but against non-Mass weapons, perhaps they could have a modifier.

Yes, mass weapons, two-handed sword, big stuff like that would be very hard to parry, and would use the existant DTN (if allowed at all), but smaller weapons could get a -1 modifier to DTN, reflecting how you can guide it faster to parry a blow - and, of course, to follow genre conventions.

I agree with shortswords being more difficult to parry with. The point I am trying to make, is that the high DTN will not reflect the style of duels and characters that Gemmell is renowned for. Not many players interested in survival will design characters with duel swords when they'll get cut to pieces by a man with sword and shield. It might be realistic, but not true to many of the Gemmell characters. A large part of his popularity is that his stories are character driven. It would discourage players to design characters like Tenaka Khan, Decado, Culain, Angel, Rage, Senta, Tarantio/Dace etc.

I'm not sure about this... Gemmell's characters tend to travel very light, and that might be why they don't have shields with them. Also, most of their opponents also do not have heavy armour, which would negate some of the need for bigger weapons. The saber, for example, which some very good swordsmen in his books use, has fairly decent stats, and I could fully see someone use it.

Also, I'd note that many of the ones who use the short swords use them as pairs, rarely alone or with other weapons - this sounds like a definite school of swordsmanship, in TRoS terms. Perhaps the short sword wasn't chosen as much for its capabilites as its easy "dual-wieldyness"? After all, it would enable stuff like the Simultaneous Block/Strike maneuvers. The saber/scimitar and the cut&thrust are both good swords in TRoS terms, and I think you missed something on the short swords - while their DTN is high, and they're not very good at all for cuts, their thrust ATN is 5, which is a very good number. What this means is that you can allot a few more dice into defence as you know that your low ATN will allow you to get by with fewer dice in offence.

And, of course, short swords are just that - short. They're bad initially, but once you get inside their reach, it's they who're in trouble!

[Snikwas]

I'm not sure about this... Gemmell's characters tend to travel very light, and that might be why they don't have shields with them. Also, most of their opponents also do not have heavy armour, which would negate some of the need for bigger weapons.

You might have a point there. Although, I would rather improve the stats for Shortsword slightly to ensure that it is still an attractive option compared to a Sabre/Scimitar. It would avoid any temptation for players to choose a particular weapon due to game stats (no matter how realistic) over genre. Gemmells fights rarely, if ever, come down to differences in weapons the combatants are using.

Just my opionion, YMMV.

[Thanaeon]

Yeah, it's the tactics that make the difference in his books. Now, how come this reminds me of some particular role-playing game..? ;-)

But I'd like to point again, just to emphasise its importance, one crucial detail about short swords as presented in the rules: its thrusting ATN of five is as low as the DTN of shields! This is very important; not only does it mean that the weapon is obviously good at attacking, but it allows you to risk one or two dice more on defence, which offsets the higher DTN to a degree.

[Snikwas]

But I'd like to point again, just to emphasise its importance, one crucial detail about short swords as presented in the rules: its thrusting ATN of five is as low as the DTN of shields! This is very important; not only does it mean that the weapon is obviously good at attacking, but it allows you to risk one or two dice more on defence, which offsets the higher DTN to a degree.

I know what you mean. Then it just becomes a thrust and parry duel. None of Gemmell's famous spinning on his heel moves, even if you should spin on the ball of your foot. Maybe a duel sword proficiency that reduces the parry DTN and increases the thrust ATN of shortswords. A bit unrealistic, but might help keep the spirit of Gemmell's duels. The shortswords would be distinguished by their short range, rather than their thrusting and defensive qualities. Just a thought.

[Thanaeon]

I see what you mean now... You'd like some more variance to the short sword fighting style.

Well, concerning the "spinning on his heels" move, I have to possibilities that I could think of on such a short notice.

1), and this might be my favourite option, is to do it like Stunts in Exalted. Basically, you describe it, but in game terms, it's still just a parry, plus maybe a die or two of stunt bonus for your description. Won't work forever, as repeating the same description too often is just boring, and thus you'll end getting the bonuses. On the other hand, the spinning might be something that just takes place naturally when executing a parry with enough dice, so maybe it can just be left up to description. After all, a parry need not be just a parry - there's always room to describe it more evocatively, making different fighters have a different feel in combat just because their moves are described differently.

2), you make it into a maneuver. For an activation cost (say, 1 or 2 CP) you can lower the DTN or ATN in question by one or two levels. (Note, this is the principle: I have no idea if this would be balanced, just throwing up ideas here.)

[Snikwas]

I see what you mean now... You'd like some more variance to the short sword fighting style.

Partly, but also to partially divource fighting tactics from weapon choices and make them more based on character concept and fighting style. TROS did a great job with the weapons and having duelists fight in the manner best suited to the weapon (eg thrusting from close range with shortswords or half-swording with bastard swords). However, they either pigeonhole players into fighting in the best style or encourage players to choose the best weapons tactically. Gemmell's work is not too concerned about this, although there are isolated examples of it. More variance with all weapons, particularly swords.

As a player in a Drenai or Riganti campaign I'd like to roleplay the sort of characters that Gemmell wrote about and note be concerned that I am choosing suboptimal weapons. No concerns that even though I choose to fight with two shortswords, like Decado or Tarantio/Dace, I am going to cut to pieces by the first opponent of near equal skill using a superior weapons system, sword and shield.

1. Is a good option. "Spinning on his heel" might just be a steal initiative move or declaring an attack at the same time. Your effectively dead if you fail to steal the initiative.

2. No idea about balance either, but it might be effective. I'd favour making the one handed sword stats more equal in ATN and DTN to make them more equivalent. Use damage and range stats to differeniate them.