Playing The Riddle of Steel (a little)

[Clinton R. Nixon]

Paul -

Sorry about that. When I set up the RoS forum, I forgot to set the permissions so guests couldn't post. Fixed now.

Clinton

[Lance D. Allen]

'ello,

I'd like to point out that Riddle of Steel was one of the first games I checked out upon coming to the Forge, and that I was immediately intrigued. I read the website stuff mostly because the name was interesting, and I got hooked on the idea of the game because of the rather interesting combat mechanics. I saw them, and just said to myself "Hmm.. Wonder how that would work out in this situation..."

I am, somewhat like Valamir, a bit of a rulesmonkey. I like neat mechanics, or at least simple ones which work for various aspects. My own game is more of the latter than the former, but Riddle of Steel's combat mechanic, and the vague references to how magic worked really whetted my taste.

However, I decided upon looking at the price and ordering section that I probably wouldn't attempt to buy the game direct, but would possibly pick it up if I saw it in a gaming store, and had the dough. Not really sure what prompted this decision, but that's what I came to. Question I'm having is on distribution... How widely can RoS be found? What are the chances that I'd find it in a gaming/comic book store in Phoenix, AZ? Would I be better off trying to order it direct?

[Russell Hoyle]

From reading the info on the aforementioned web site, its only available by direct sales currently (until August ISTR)

Rusty

[Jake Norwood]

TROS is only available through direct order currently, but that doesn't mean that stores don't have it--only that distributors don't (though we did ship to Esdivium, the London distributor, today! Woo-hoo!).

It just so happens that Imperial Outpost Games (//www.imperialoutpost.com), in Phoenix AZ loves The Riddle of Steel, and have been carrying it for about a month now.

You can reach them at

4212 W. Cactus Rd. ste. 1111
Phoenix, AZ 85027
(602) 862-9683

We met the manager, "Preacher" Bob at GAMA, and bonded immediately. They're even starting some sort of TROS tournament structure down there. I'll probably be visiting Phoenix for some Convention in late July as well.

For a semi-complete list of Retailers CURRENTLY carrying The Riddle of Steel, go to our page //www.theriddleofsteel.com/market/best.htm, or if that doesn't work go to the //www.theriddleofsteel.com/marketand click on the "only the best" link.

Jake

[Jake Norwood]

Jake,I think that a fourth section to that section, called, "What's the point" or something like that, would be a perfect place for a Spiritual Attributes discussion, exactly as you described to me verbally at GAMA. You have the words, but they need to be on a page. Also, include a reference to the same issues in the FAQ section, just as you do with combat.

Done.

Go see www.theriddleofsteel.com/whatis

Jake

[contracycle]

It might be worth a go, Paul.  I've done a fair amount of fantasy gaming with what sounds like a simliar level of mechanical detail (but without the cunning mechanic and whatnot), I found my habitual barbarian axe-wielders developed a distinct fondness for rapiers.  I speculate that what was furstarting them was a sense of decisiveness in combat, hence the max damage approach.  Once they could kill flat out with little pointy things they started getting very light-footed.  Its the throwing knioves you have to watch out for :)

[Ron Edwards]

Jake,

That's very good web text for the new section, and I'm not talking about the quotes from me. It's solid.

I was looking through the GM-type, what-play-is-about section in the book again, and the emphasis on the Spiritual Attributes and the "point of play" can't get more explicitly Narrativist than that.

Again, it's all about the examples. Some folks are staring in horror at the price of sorcery, for instance, and they are completely missing the point that sorcerers will casting magic for passionate reasons, and thus will have 5 to 7 more dice available than is immediately obvious from just looking at sorcery pools.

To me, once I read the stuff in Chapter One about the Spiritual Attributes, I'm all set - I just apply it as I go through the following chapters about combat and sorcery. But I have discovered through painful experience that people don't do this much. In Sorcerer, it's very much like ROS; the first chapter explains a whole ton of ways to get bonus dice, then the combat and sorcery come later, and I expect readers to be applying the Chapter One stuff as they go. But a few people have wailed, "You didn't say you can use bonus dice in sorcery!" and when I say, "Um, yes I did, in Chapter One, first thing," they wail again, "But you didn't say it right there!"

So if we're talking about any changes for the August edition, one key example in the Codex section and one key example in the Sorcery chapter, both very heavily based on showing how Spiritual Attributes make the difference in play, would be my highest recommendation.

Best,
Ron

[Valamir]

Heh, as one of those types of people...
IMO having a central locaton ("Chapter One) where all of the "cool bonus" stuff is located and then expecting players to extrapolate that chapter throughout the rest of the book is a flawed layout strategy.

First and foremost when using rules as reference material (particularly in-game) you are going to use the chapter dedicated to what you're looking up and aren't likely to cross reference back to "Chapter One".  If the cool feature isn't in the combat section when I'm looking up combat stuff, and it isn't in the sorcery section when I'm looking up sorcery stuff, chances are its going to get overlooked.

Secondly, placing the cool stuff first may SEEM like a good idea on the grounds that the stuff thats first is the most important.  In practice I'd say thats the WORST location for things like Spiritual traits and Sorcerer die bonuses.  When people read the rules for the first time, the first thing they'll encounter is all the cool stuff...which they'll have no real idea how to use so it will only be partially understood.  By the time they get done with the rest of the book, that first chapter will be long forgotten.  Better would be to have the cool stuff towards the end so that it can be understood in the context of all of the rules that have already been read.  Best would be to integrate the cool stuff over and over in each pertinent section.

And third, traditionally the early section of RPG rulebooks is where the nonsense fluff stuff is found.  The "Introduction", the "how to roll dice", the "Whats an RPG", the flavor BS etc.  I think most RPG buyers are more or less trained to think of the first X pages as being the crap you have to skim through before you get to the meat...so putting the important core concepts right at the beginning I think is conflicting with this tendency.


My advice would be to go a step farther than just example (although definitely have those) but include a side bar summary "reminder" about Spiritual Traits and how they are used specific to the section in question.

Going by the rule that the stuff written about most in the rules will get played the most in the game, I'd hit this feature over and over and over until only the most determined player could even think of playing RoS without also thinking about these rules.  Basically just integrate their use into everying rather than put them in one section where they could be thought of as just something tacked on to the game as an after thought (which clearly isn't the way they were designed to be).

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Ralph,

It's a differing-values thing. I tend to hold expectations for readers, one of which is actually to read what's written and to consider it critically. In some ways, Sorcerer was written in an elitist fashion - if you don't get it, good-bye; if you do, cool; if you're intrigued but not inclined to get critical about it, then you have a choice, to leave or to enter into dialogue (which is available).

Don't anyone get mad about that yet; I have more to say. One thing is that Sorcerer tends to minimize the "good-bye" part and maximize the "intrigued" part. To me, that's an advantage, because it means more people will play their take on the game rather than accepting my spoon-fed stuff, which I refuse to provide beyond good examples.

Now, before anyone gets mad ... These days, I look at things a little differently. Both Elfs and (soon) Trollbabe are written to be more accessible, both in terms of mechanics and in terms of internalizing the look and feel.

So for The Riddle of Steel, I think it's up to Jake just how he wants to go about it. There will come, eventually, a bar that one has to set in terms of expectations from the reader; I think that taking a baby-bird play-it-for-me reader to be the default is doomed to failure, especially for games that require judgment and a certain desire to exercise that judgment both creatively and thematically.

Best,
Ron

[Dav]

Jake (et al);

It seems to me, having spent a bit to make my character for TROS, that your Narrativist hook is strong enough to survive without need for down-and-dirty explanations.  What I mean by this is that it will only take a person experiencing the hell of someone with Drive (Protect the Secret of Nymh) [bad example all 'round] at 3, and your silly PC ass trying to figure it out, to sell the point.  Those 3 dice are going to put someone in a quick and early grave.  

This, combined with an improvement system that fluctuates during play (for the Spiritual Attributes), means that characters naturally will drive toward those goals through gameplay that can give them "oh shit" dice.  Spiritual Attributes, acting even as a hedge (for you gamists flying about) against outlier rolls still means that your character is acting in the interests of internal motivations to succeed in combat.

The Riddle of Steel seems to be: combat is where the heart is.  With everything funneling toward making your character a more efficient warrior, the natural extension is to make that killing meaningful.  You succeed already with the Spiritual mechanics and their development.

The in-game improvement means even the rudest, min-maxing bore on the planet wants to play to them.  This is, of course, because play, then, can have a double-duty improvement.  Have your Spiritual Attributes increase through play, and the swash and the buckling improve through more traditional end-of-game points.

I don't see that there is a direct need for change, mainly because I think the improvement system of the game sells the overall philosophy (which is EXACTLY what a good improvement system should do).  Kudos.

Dav

[Jake Norwood]

Dav et all-

Thanks. That's very much how we felt (Dav's post) out here, but hearing what everyone else thinks is always helpful (no matter what we do with it).

One thing that always clears stuff up is actual play. When you play TROS, those Spiritual Attributes become very prominent, if not in the first game, then in the second, because every player says "gimme my XPs," and then says "what can I use those for?" followed by "Well that woulda helped when I was fighting the dude that stole my girl..."

But a reminder littered throughout isn't a bad idea either.

btw, Ron, I ordered Sorcerer from my FLGS today.

Jake

[Lance D. Allen]

System: Besides issues already posted Re: Sorcery et al, I love the system. It's form follows function to a tee. However, I can see Val's point. Valamir is not a "baby bird" RPG player, yet he admits a tendency to skip over the front when first reviewing a game. This should cite the example that "baby birds" are not the only sort who might miss the goodies in the front. I admit to some of this tendency myself, especially when it *does* begin with an intro. (Intros are fun to read, but when you're trying to get to the meat, you tend to skip them) However, schooled by comments on here, I read through the intro, and paid particular attention to the Spiritual Attributes. I must say, just *reading* those had me getting character ideas, but I think that was because I started with the knowledge of what they were for. Many people, when trying to get the meat, skip over the attribute descriptions, expecting them to be the same old thing, and come back to them when it comes time to create characters.

The above is, I guess, just my convoluted way of agreeing with Valamir. As Spiritual Attributes are a primary mechanic, SELL them. Make it very, very plain that the game is "'bout that". Where they are in the book is fine, but make sure that the reader WILL go back and pay attention to them, if he does skim over them the first time.

Edited to remove unnecessary content

[Lance D. Allen]

Edited to remove repetitious content

[Lance D. Allen]

'nother quick question.. I noticed a few things that appeared to be missing from your charts. I didn't see a weapon chart for ranged or thrown weapons, though they do exist in the purchase lists. (bows, throwing knives, etc.) Am I missing something, or is the book missing it?

Also, is Flower of Battle out yet? I'm interested to see what *didn't* get included in the core book. If it is, can I buy it retail, or is it on an order only basis right now?

[Jake Norwood]

Grayed out swords, huh...we DID! That's the problem with printers. On the original manuscript they're 5% gray...you can hardly see them. Live and learn.

Ranged weapons are at the end of all the weapons.

Typos and what not are the main focus of the August print. And I'd love to get another sheet of errata. Every one is a bit different.

Jake