My group finished their second TROS session on Monday (third if you count character creation). So far, their impressions are mixed, and I am wondering what I could do to improve our game. Since most problems we ran into were rules-related, I post it here and not in actual play (mods, feel free to move it there if it's more appropriate). And please don't take this personally, even though the rules section focuses on the negative. I'm just looking for some advice here.

Setting
The game is set in Hyboria, using Mongoose's Conan RPG for background. I converted the human races and equipment from that book, and it worked quite well. As for the time, the story is set after the last Conan story by REH (Hour of the Dragon). So Aquilonia has recently defeated Nemedia in battle, and Conan is king.

Characters
The PCs are members or retainers of the Morantes family, minor Nemedian nobles living next to the Border Kingdom. This means they have to deal with the bandits and other rabble living there on a frequent basis. Also, they have been feuding with their neighbours, the Scyla family, for the last 100 or so years.

Albano Morantes
Albano is the good-looking heir of the Morantes estate. The current baron is his deceased father's younger brother, Dario, a cripple and drunkard who gives a lot of leeway to his kin and employees. Albano is mostly interested in politics and socializing, having distinctly effeminate manners. He can be somewhat effective fighting on horseback, but is nearly incompetent as a footman. He has a TO of 6, but EN 2, HT 3, and Per 2, which means that he is lame and blind in full plate. Overall, an interesting character, with a lot of potential for comic relief.

His SAs are:
Destiny (become king)
Drive (become influential noble)
Luck
Passion (hate Aquilonia)
Passion (hate Scyla family)

Hassan Morantes
The bastard half-brother of Albano (his mother is from Koth), a landless adventurer who lives off of uncle Dario's generosity. He is an avid duellist but has no particular interest in real battles. As a lecher, he is the prime target of abuse for Helena (see below).

His SAs are:
Destiny (become accepted noble)
Drive (become most famous duellist)
Faith (Mitra)
Luck
Passion (hate Scyla family)

Marius Son of Dragan
A mercenary sergeant serving the Morantes family. He has a terribly scarred face and a bad temperament to match. Since he failed to either protect his lord or die with him in the decisive battle (the one at the end of Hour of the Dragon), he feels guilty and nurses a deathwish.

Destiny (die in battle)
Faith (Mitra)
Luck
Passion (hate Aquilonians)
Passion (loyal to Morantes family)

Helena Ricardo
Helena is a mystery woman. She is an extremely good looking Brythunian who was found wandering near the border of the Morantes's barony. Somehow, Helena convinced Dario to hire her as a bodyguard for his nephews. This was in part due to some real swordfighting skill, and in part due to the impression she made on Hassan.

I'm not posting her SAs, since the player wanted to keep them secret, but so far she has mainly attempted to sweet-talk, swindle, and steal to get her way. And she's cheeky, too. BTW, Helena is played by a guy.

Urdaa
Urdaa is a servant girl, whose mother was brought back from a campaign in Turan by Albano's father. She is one of Albano's personal servants (he has an A priority in social), and responsible for all sorts of menial tasks. She's also good at medicine and dealing with animals, but her skills in these areas are not yet appreciated. Since the players know it already, I can tell you that Urdaa is a witch, with points in Growth, Conquer, Vision, and Banishment (healing, divination, and dealing with minor spirits)

As with Helena, Urdaa's SAs are secret (and she is played by a guy). So far, she has been gentle, soft-spoken, and obedient. But as she met a more experienced witch last session, she may start to develop her sorcerous talent soon enough.

Story so far

I'll post this later, when I have more time.

Rules
Now to the mechanical side of things:

Attributes
One of my players remarked that you don't need high EN or HT if you have good TO. I found this rather funny, and pointed him for the rules for falling damage... Still, TO is a real life-saver. It seems ok for a Hyborian age game, though.

Overall, the attribute system works well. The only problem might be that the improvement rules encourage min-maxing, since high values cost the same during chargen but are more expensive later. I know this has never been a concern of Jake, but I am a little afraid that I'll be seeing quite a few big dumb combat clones soon.

Spiritual Attributes
I think we "get" them. Personally, I like them, but found it hard to give out 3-5 per session. In fact, if I had not given out one free point per player every session, some would have gotten none. When I post the full story, I'll put in some notes on when I did or did not give points and why. Maybe I'm just too stingy;)

Also, my players speculated how useful it would be too spend your beginning SAs on improvement right away. Any experiences with that?

Skills
For my personal taste, there are too many skills. And some of the packages seem a little odd - so a rogue can sneak but not hide?! Maybe we'll switch to the vocation system of the QS rules later on.

Skill improvement is also a little odd - some skills are just used way more often than others. E.g. we agreed that using Body Language in combat would only grant you one mark per battle, not per check. Else, the duellist would have a rating of 3 after the 4th or 5th session. How do you handle this?

Flaws
I have the same problem with the flaw system which I have with GURPS: I don't like flaws that dictate behaviour. Even though TROS forces a WP check to ignore such flaws, I as Seneschal have to remember them in the first place. And then care enough to bring them up and interrupt a free-flowing dialogue or story. So overall, they give PCs something for nothing (or very little).

What I find especially strange are flaws like Greed or Lecherousness. These seem to be perfectly suitable Drives to me! And as SAs, bringing them up is the players's decision, not mine. I am definitely going to drop all those "character flaws" if I start a new game. Maybe allow two Drive SAs as compensation.

Combat
Combat takes long, at least between skilled opponents who know what they are doing. Since combat is also quite interesting, this is no problem for those involved. But the group contains one duellist and one troublemaker. Which means many combats involving only one PC. What do I do to keep the others occupied? One of my players suggested I let the "spectators" run the opponent. I told him I needed to learn the system first for myself, but would allow them to do that later. Do you have any experience with that?

Also, at least one of my players thinks that combat is too random, making it too easy to die. I don't see that, at least not if you use SAs properly - e.g. buying an automatic success with Luck to defend against a serious attack is very helpful. Especially since the opponent has usually overextended a little to finish you off.

Impressions
- My players found the story more interesting and free-flowing than our (currently on hold) D&D game. However, they are not sure if or how to attribute this to the game system. I believe that it is in part because the D&D game is high level and tends to degenerate into a spell-slinging contest. With a lower level D&D group, I could probably get a more interesting story as well.

- SAs seem to be quite well received, but the players are a little reluctant to take risks related to them. That may account for the small number of points I gave out so far.

- Having people ask all the time whether they can use SAs or get a skill improvement is a little tedious. It seems that it would be simpler to handle skill improvement via SAs.

- Combat involving only one PC leaves the others on the sideline, sometimes for 20 or 30 minutes if neither opponent can easily wound the other.

So there are some good things and some bad things, and my players are not sure whether to continue TROS or return to D&D completely. For me, it is a refreshing change from D&D, but I would like to retool some parts of the system to make it more rules-light (for the G/N/S purists: I don't mean more Narrativist, but simply less handling-intensive, ok?)

Thoughts? Advice?

Spiritual Attributes
I think we "get" them. Personally, I like them, but found it hard to give out 3-5 per session. In fact, if I had not given out one free point per player every session, some would have gotten none. When I post the full story, I'll put in some notes on when I did or did not give points and why. Maybe I'm just too stingy;)

Also, my players speculated how useful it would be too spend your beginning SAs on improvement right away. Any experiences with that?

nsruf wrote: Flaws
I have the same problem with the flaw system which I have with GURPS: I don't like flaws that dictate behaviour. Even though TROS forces a WP check to ignore such flaws, I as Seneschal have to remember them in the first place. And then care enough to bring them up and interrupt a free-flowing dialogue or story. So overall, they give PCs something for nothing (or very little).

What I find especially strange are flaws like Greed or Lecherousness. These seem to be perfectly suitable Drives to me! And as SAs, bringing them up is the players's decision, not mine. I am definitely going to drop all those "character flaws" if I start a new game. Maybe allow two Drive SAs as compensation.

Mike Holmes wrote: This statement, and the one about the players not taking risks with SAs indicate that you might not "get" them. OTOH, that's not surprising, really, because the book doesn't say some important things about "best practices."

How did you prepare the game? If I had these characters with these SAs, all my prep would revolve around creating the Scylla family, the Morantes family, some Aquilonian diplomats, and the local court. Just a web of NPCs belonging to these groups. Play would begin with PCs getting involved with these NPCs, and just go from there - no plot in my mind. Just keep putting them into situations where the SAs have an opportunity to be used.

The point is that if you have them contact nothing but stuff related to their SAs you'll be giving out points constantly. Players asking to use SAs mean that they're interested in what's going on - it's a good sign. The more it's happening, the better job you're doing as GM.

I find it odd that they think that things are risky with SAs when they're much riskier without them. Or do they just avoid risk altogether.

Your job as GM is to make that impossible. Just keep putting them in situations where all they have is a choice of what sort of risk to take.

I'll leave scene framing to someone else to describe. But, in the games I run, everyone is always sitting out for 20 minutes or more at a time. But nobody cares. It sounds like you're still stuck in "party" mode.

Stephen wrote: I would suggest against making Greed or Lechery Drives. The difference between a Flaw and an SA is that a Flaw represents an aspect of character behaviour the player can't willingly control, unlike SAs. Things like Greed, Rage, and Lechery are essentially impersonal and unpredictable -- they're meant to throw obstacles into the story, not to assist in overcoming other obstacles.

SAs always have an element of willing embrace to them, and are related to specific goals, people, and fates -- it's the difference between a Passion for Helen of Troy that leads you to take on the Greek army, and a thing for women with big gazongas that leads you to do something truly stupid at a party.

Bear in mind that Flaws taken is a D or E (for humans) Priority accounted for, giving you more room to put A, B and C in Attributes, Proficiencies and Skills. So they do give something back; they give you a head-start in areas others will have to catch up with you on.

Now, if the idea of behaviour-dictating Flaws doesn't sit well with you in the first place, that's one thing,

but there are enough differences in the way Flaws and SAs handle that simply converting one to the other wouldn't be as transparent as you think. A Flaw is a minor recurring obstacle with the potential to cause some interesting disruptions; an SA is a major storyline drive, and trying to make a generalized greed or lechery into that kind of motivation does, I think, bog down stories more than the original format.

when people aren't involved in a scene I give them an NPC to run who is. easy..

Doesn't matter if the NPC is central or peripheral, the combat system really endears itself to this really easily.

Also, with the time issue, I'm not sure how long you've been playing but that seems like a long time for a one on one...

Have you tried d/ling the GM screens and the TROS Cards to speed up handling time? How much of that time is people searching and then reading rules? I've often made a rule that states people can only use maneuvres they're immediately familiar with, unless you have a spare player who'll "Sub" for you and give you the rules as you request them... This might help get people into the game.

As for the SAs issue, others have put it far better than I have, but just 'cos i can... Don't fall into the trap of running the game like D&D (you probably don't but it bears repeating), Penalise them for not persuing their SAs(I rarely do this but who knows eh?), if someone asks if their SA is relevant, Make it relevant, even if it wasn't immediately apparent. Get a red hot iron and start poking their SAs... they'll eventually bite...

*ahem*

JK...

Malechi wrote: when people aren't involved in a scene I give them an NPC to run who is. easy..

Doesn't matter if the NPC is central or peripheral, the combat system really endears itself to this really easily.

Also, with the time issue, I'm not sure how long you've been playing but that seems like a long time for a one on one...

Have you tried d/ling the GM screens and the TROS Cards to speed up handling time? How much of that time is people searching and then reading rules?

As for the SAs issue, others have put it far better than I have, but just 'cos i can... Don't fall into the trap of running the game like D&D (you probably don't but it bears repeating), Penalise them for not persuing their SAs(I rarely do this but who knows eh?), if someone asks if their SA is relevant, Make it relevant, even if it wasn't immediately apparent.

nsruf wrote:

Malechi wrote: when people aren't involved in a scene I give them an NPC to run who is. easy..

I'll try that. But the fights in question were duels, so I couldn't have involved more than one other player. Still leaving three out.

Not neccessarary true. It seems your players running fighters appear to like hogging the limelight a little too much and seek one on one scenes by challenging NPCs to duels at the slightest provocation.

In short you need something to make these hot-heads think a bit more before 'demanding satisfaction' and at the same time bring the other players into the combat. Here's two scenarios you could use.

1. The next NPC they challenge is no gentleman what so ever and further more he's a popular patron at the rather seedy joint the group encounter him at. What happens when his mates decide to help him with the upstart?

2. The town guard turn up in the middle of a duel. They proceed to attempt to arrest both combatents for 'disturbing the peace'...

I'm having a hard time figuring out your players. They make characters that have certain motives, then you put them into situations where those motives apply, and they avoid the situations? That's just peculiar. Have you asked them what it is that they're interested in getting out of playing the game?

What you can do, again, is what I mentioned above. Don't allow them to ignore situations. That is, make "ignoring" an extreme option. An easy way to do this is to put SAs in conflict with each other. For example, have a situation where an important member of the Morantes family tells Marius that he has to escort an Aquilonian safely somewhere. There are lots of things that Marius can do, but they all say something about his SAs. If he says he won't do it, then he's said that his hate of Aquilonians is more important than his loyalty to the Morantes family. If he takes the job, then have the Aquilonian insult him on the trip. Such that he either goes with his loyalty (gaining him bonuses to his ability to retort), or at some point he breaks and goes with his hatred (gaining him bonuses to his attack or something).

In these examples, don't penalize the one that's being ignored (that would be hosing the player), instead, just reward the one that was supported.

By coming up with situations like this, you make it so that the players don't have an option that allows them to avoid the conflict. It's not the GM's purview to be trying to find reasons to hold back SA points, but he should be trying to help the player find ways to get SA points.

Mike

Hi,

I think we "get" them. Personally, I like them, but found it hard to give out 3-5 per session. In fact, if I had not given out one free point per player every session, some would have gotten none. When I post the full story, I'll put in some notes on when I did or did not give points and why. Maybe I'm just too stingy;)

Also, my players speculated how useful it would be too spend your beginning SAs on improvement right away. Any experiences with that?

Also (i know this works in my game) if a player backs away from something that is directly related to his SA then he gets penalised . One of my players has "defend the innocent"... when there is an innocent getting beaten on and the player is well within his means to defend him then he better do so or he would lose an SA point. This will get them to take the risks associated with having certain SA's


I have made up some good combat reference sheets ( i have tried sending them through to jake but they are to big) and i also use the rule that Malechi does in that if a player doesn't know a maneaovre then he can't use it. Means that in the off scenes when a particular player isn't doing anything he is reading the rules, and getting used to what he can use

nsruf wrote: Still, a fight between two equally skilled characters with high TO and light armor can take 8-10 rounds before one lands a lucky hit.

Overdrive wrote: My thoughts on this: whattheheck? There's no such thing. Nobody's going to get into a fight with an equally-skilled opponent on a fair ground. It's 50-50, man. Toss a coin and die.

Hi, this on of the players in this campaign piping up, Helena's to be precise.

Not quite sure where to start, as nsruf summarized our impressions and problems rather well.

Maybe I can clarify on the "not taking risks" part a bit from the side of the players. Our Seneschal (and a couple of test-fights) made it clear that this is a realistic combat system, and the game is set in a rather harsh and brutal world. Some of us being a bit annoyed by the unrealistic "bring 'em on" attitude that D&D encourages, we try to play this game reallistcally. And that means avoiding risks. Even if I survive a fight, I might end up injured or maimed rather easily - ruining my characters life and my fun.

The situation that was obviously tailored towards SAs included a hooker being terrorized by her pimp and his bully. We encountered the scene as a pair of two women, one of them obviously noncombatant (Helena and Urda), and decided it is better not the get involved in other people's buisness - realistic, but not taking risks...

"not taking on equal opponents" isn't really an option IMHO, for several reasons

1) Our game contains mainly human opponents, and its hard to judge whether they are equals or not. Even a under-average bully with some points in Strength and Toughness and a point or two in the right SA can become a dangerous opponent - you never know until it is to late

2) While a fight with a equal opponent might be "toss a coin - loser dies" a fight with underated opponents is "you take a scratch - he dies" which wouldn't warrant a fight either - combat it the big novelty in TROS and we wan't to try that out.

3) Fights needn't be to the death, so here's a chance to test out your skills on a worthy opponent. The three duels we had so far weren't fought to the death, at least one of them intentionally so. Still, they take time.

4) Fighting only bullies is rather anticlimatic. From time-to-time, players should have to face a equal opponent (or one which is better and can be taken down only as a team)

My impression is from the game that NPC's don't have SA's unless they are major characters (and then its a matter of group taste.) SA's aren't really a character trait, they are a player resource. Jake or Brian, is that correct?

The premise of the game is the basic question (which I believe I remember from one of Ralph Mazza's (Valamir) posts is, "What are you willing to risk death for?" Or even more interesting "What are you willing to kill for?" If the players aren't in situations where their SA's are in play and they are putting it all on the line for something, then the question isn't being asked.

(that reads more critical than I intend it to, but I hope it helps.)

Trevis

Here's the simple equation that everyone seems to be missing. Yes, don't ever fight an equal opponent.

Unless you aren't equal.

See, there's two considerations. One is how "skilled" your character is, essentially. The other is how much he (or the player) cares about the situation. If the character has SAs that apply, then a character who is normally equal to another is now superior. Even if it only gives you a two die advantage, that's actually pretty large (especially if you use the "correct" method and apply them to each and every roll, not just to a combat pool).

Basically, the game is geared to make you capable of fighting and winning as long as your SAs are involved. If you fight for something for which you aren't getting any SA bonuses, then you're taking your character's life into your own hands.

So, in conclusion, when you don't have SAs firing, then refrain from fighting more, when they're firing, fight more. Is that making sense?

Mike

on the equal opponent fights, dont forget to fight smart and fight dirty. A toss in the right spot or a good insult and then counter combo can work wonders. Try the maneuvers out until you understand what works with what. I find that evasive attacks, simultaneous block strikes and other red red manevers can be great, as are feints when used right. The maneuvers are your best friends in this combat system.

I think we have the "how to fight" down pretty well already (basically taking the combat system as a Gamist challenge). The "when to fight" may be the problem;)

BTW, sorry for not posting the story yet. This takes longer to write up than I thought. Maybe today.

I'm still not done with the last session, but here are the first two:

0. Session

After explaining the basic rules, and before we started character generation, I described the opening scene. Since I had no idea what the group would end up like, I had them start not at home but abroad. I also wanted to borrow a suggestion from these boards and start with a fight scene between NPCs - controlled by the players to introduce the combat system.

The - as yet nondescript - party starts in a seedy tavern in the trading town of Ardena, a couple of miles south of the Morantes's barony. I explain shortly that they are going to be members or retainers of this family, and that they are visiting the local spring festival to enjoy themselves and hire a master brewer for their uncle/lord Dario (the drunkard). I didn't want to introduce anything more restrictive without knowing the PCs first.

The tavern's main attraction is a gladiatorial pit, with two combats taking place this evening. The first fight is between two professional pit-fighters, a huge Aesir northman armed with two daggers (and little else), and a tough Nemedian with a shortsword and shield. Combat lasts for several rounds, and neither combatant suffers worse than a level 2 wound, although the players decided not to pull punches (I let it pass for eductional reasons). The Nemedian is declared victor after at least 10 rounds (I forgot), because he has hit more often. The players are impressed by the importance of TO.

The second combat is in many ways the exact opposite of the first: a Hyperborean convicted for robbery and murder is to be killed by two thugs. The local lord has sent the prisoner as a special "treat" because of the spring festival. The thugs have clubs, and to make things more interesting, a spectator throws the unarmed bandit a knife. I should note that the bandit was physically superior to the thugs and had an SA Passion (hate all foreigners), while his opponents had a little Luck. After failing his terrain roll, the Hyperborean's player decides he has no chance and throws red anyway, as do his opponents. The outcome is predictable: one thug and the bandit die messily.

With some lessons learned (hopefully) from combat, we made characters (see above). I told my players that I hadn't decided on their family relations yet, and that they could introduce NPCs by taking suitable Passions, but they only took generic SAs ("loyal to Morantes", "hate Scyla family"). I'm not sure whether they were afraid I would "screw them over" by kidnapping their beloveds, or whether the idea to be able to shape the setting was simply alien to them.

1. Session

We started right after the pit fights, with focus switching to the PCs sitting at a nearby table. There was some introduction and banter, until a pair of local nobles approached the group. Their leader introduced himself as Lucan Verdano, son of the city's ruler, and his comrade as Cladio Quinius, his trusted friend and secretary. He asked for their names and origin, and whether they wouldn't appreciate "gentlemanly combat" more than the crude spectacle of the pit-fight. Albano didn't bite (he's a wuss, combat-wise), but Hassan indicated that he would be very interested in some friendly sparring. Lucan invited the PCs to a party at his fathers "country house" the next evening and left. There were also some meaningful glances between Helena and Cladio, but the woman lost interest quickly once she learned he as poor and landless.

Next, Albano sends Urdaa to fetch some decent wine, because the tavern doesn't satisfy his standards. Helena accompanies her for safety, so the girls explore town on their own. They hear some scuffling in an alley and stop to listen: a pimp is beating one of his whores and accuses her of donating money to a priest of Mitra. This encounter was intended as a first attempt to bring SAs into play, since several of the PCs have Conscience or Faith (Mitra), plus Helena has this thing about male chauvinist pigs. But after noticing the pimp's muscular Kushite bodyguard, the girls shout some insult and leave quickly. So no SA points used or earned.

Urdaa and Helena find another tavern, buy drinks for their discriminating masters, and fend off some drunken elderly craftsman who is easily intimdated. On their way out, they meet the beaten whore from the previous scene, and Helena lectures her on not letting others push her around. The girl merely replies that she needs someone to protect her, and that there are far worse people in town.

Soon after the women return with the wine, the group decides to leave (it is past midnight). They return to their inn, and Helena complains to Hassan about having to stay in servant accomodation. Hassan points put that there is room in his bed, but is quickly put down and told to get her a room of her own. Which turns out to be unavailable because of the festival. After some more inter-party banter, everybody goes to bed.

The next morning, the group takes quite long to assemble, since Albano stays in bed till noon, and little can be done without the "boss". Finally, they get to meet the master brewer whom Albano's secretary has contacted previously. The man turns out to be very eager to leave his current employer, a merchant who has no "appreciation for the finer arts of beermaking". In fact, since his wife is dead and his apprentice incompetent, he is quite willing just to pack up and leave unannounced. Since this saves the Morantes from paying off the merchant, they quickly agree to the deal.

BTW, the above involved no SAs whatsoever. The PCs are simply running errands for their uncle, and if they don't like it - well that would be the time to bring in some SAs...

In the evening, the group arrives only an hour or so late at the Verdano mansion, because Helena took Hassan shopping for some decent clothes. They are all given adequate accomodation and told to join the party which is taking place outside. There is some brief confusion as Helena doesn't want to share a room with Hassan, but finally agrees to share a room with Lucan's 16 year old cousin Giulia. Some girl-talk ensues...

At the party, the PCs have the opportunity to talk to some guests. Nothing particularly interesting happens, but this was probably my fault as I hadn't prepared the guests in advance (lack of time and such). After a while, Lucan mentions to Hassan that it would be a good time for some friendly sparring. A large part of the guests follows them to an open area in the park surrounding the mansion. Notably absent is Albano, who prefers to stay inside because of his fear of insects. However, he sends his secretary to bet money on his half-brother.

The duel is the first event where SAs actually come into play. It turns out that Lucan, like Hassan, is driven to become a famous duellist. They agree to fight to the first real injury (level 1 wound or above), or until one of them gives up. The first few exchanges show that Lucan is the slightly better fighter, while Hassan has the greater Drive, which evens things out. Lucan manages to land a few hits, but deals no damage (arming sword with ST 4 vs. TO 6) since he is pulling punches*. Hassan would be able to wound his opponent, except that he is at first unable to hit him at all. Things become more heated as Lucan starts attacking for real, but it is Hassan who finally gets in the decisive blow for a level 1 wound to the neck.

The victor is celebrated (and gets a point of Drive for his victory), and Helena uses the resulting confusion to steal some rich merchant's purse. We stop at this point, and I decide to give each character another SA point, applicable to whatever trait the player believes he tried to follow most. The only other SA point awarded is a Luck point for Hassan (consolidation price for crappy rolling).

* We used the following rule for pulling punches: can be done with any damaging attack; activation cost is 1 die; damage dealt is base damage + 1 (as with a single success), and the attacker can decide to subtract any number between 0 and his MoS; declare this before rolling for exact hit location.

OK, I'm going to take a guess, and ask if you use the phrase, "Now what are you doing?" quite a lot. That is, do you leave it to the players to determine a lot of what they are doing?

This will seem contradictory to what some people have heard from me, but you don't want to leave the action solely to the players to determine...well, if not ever then almost ever. The GM should be doing his part to shape the action. If you see the players saying, "I dunno, I go shopping, that's your cue that the player doesn't know what to do to get to the action, and they're asking you to get them to it. To shove them into it until they see where they can take it from there.

PC Banter, shopping, girl talk, errands - this is all just the PCs floundering around wondering what they're supposed to be engaging. They're begging you to take them to the action.

And I'm not saying that you don't do that, but the other part is that the action that you should be shaping should be based on the PCs SAs in TROS. That is, the whole thing with going to duel at Lucan's place? What SA was that aimed at? Who's idea was it to run errands for the uncle? If that's what you came up with, then what SA was that aimed at? What did you do, if anything to precipitate Helena's flirting, or her theft? Or is that just the player on his own? If it seems random, its because you haven't shown the players where the fun stuff is.


Where are the Aquilonians to hate? Where are the Morantes to be loyal to? Where are the Scylla to hate? These are great SAs, because you can have a jillion of each, and no matter how many die or move away, there are always more to fill in. The PCs should be surrounded by nothing but these characters.

Think of it this way. The PC SAs are your roadmap to your preparations. All you have to do is come up with some NPCs who will push buttons of the PCs, and figure out why they're interested in the PCs and you're off and running. Let me be clear about that, any preparation that you're doing without a particular SA in mind in some way should just be thrown out. Have nothing ready except events which trigger the use of SAs.

It's like you want to see the players build something, they've decided to build a house, and you're giving them car parts. No surprise that they've constructed neither a house nor a car. Give them bricks, and they'll build the house. In TROS, the GM doesn't get to decide what to build, the players do.

Mike

Mike Holmes wrote: OK, I'm going to take a guess, and ask if you use the phrase, "Now what are you doing?" quite a lot. That is, do you leave it to the players to determine a lot of what they are doing?

This will seem contradictory to what some people have heard from me, but you don't want to leave the action solely to the players to determine...well, if not ever then almost ever. The GM should be doing his part to shape the action. If you see the players saying, "I dunno, I go shopping, that's your cue that the player doesn't know what to do to get to the action, and they're asking you to get them to it. To shove them into it until they see where they can take it from there.

PC Banter, shopping, girl talk, errands - this is all just the PCs floundering around wondering what they're supposed to be engaging. They're begging you to take them to the action.

And I'm not saying that you don't do that, but the other part is that the action that you should be shaping should be based on the PCs SAs in TROS. That is, the whole thing with going to duel at Lucan's place? What SA was that aimed at?

Who's idea was it to run errands for the uncle? If that's what you came up with, then what SA was that aimed at?

What did you do, if anything to precipitate Helena's flirting, or her theft? Or is that just the player on his own? If it seems random, its because you haven't shown the players where the fun stuff is.

Where are the Aquilonians to hate?

Where are the Morantes to be loyal to? Where are the Scylla to hate?

These are great SAs, because you can have a jillion of each, and no matter how many die or move away, there are always more to fill in. The PCs should be surrounded by nothing but these characters.

Think of it this way. The PC SAs are your roadmap to your preparations. All you have to do is come up with some NPCs who will push buttons of the PCs, and figure out why they're interested in the PCs and you're off and running. Let me be clear about that, any preparation that you're doing without a particular SA in mind in some way should just be thrown out. Have nothing ready except events which trigger the use of SAs.

It's like you want to see the players build something, they've decided to build a house, and you're giving them car parts. No surprise that they've constructed neither a house nor a car. Give them bricks, and they'll build the house. In TROS, the GM doesn't get to decide what to build, the players do.

nsruf wrote: I'll try that for next session. That's a heck of a lot different from prepping a D&D game, so it may take me some time to adjust.

Thats a lot to digest. Thanks for taking the time explaining it in such detail! I really think I have a better idea how to handle things now.

Hi, I am the player of Sir Albano Morantes in the campaign.

Aside from the questions of how to master the game without railroading, I would like to readress two issues which appeared earlier in this thead.

1. SAs:
From my experience as player they are a great element for deciding what to do.
Related to the issue of when and under which circumstances to fight an equal opponent, I am not sure about them. Is the number of points in a particular SA a rating for the importance to the player? If yes, how can investing points for character improvement be explained? If no, I get in trouble when my character should pick up a fight and when not. He hates the Scyla family, but when he engages a good fighter one of them, fight or not fight? Just 1 point in the SA or 4 or 5 points in the SA makes a huge difference. Does the character "know" or "feel" how many points are in the SA? Etc. Lots of open questions...

2. Flaws, Gifts, etc. which relate to character behavior:
My point of view on this issue (may be repetative in some instances):
How should a player with the "troublemaker" flaw behave when he meets someone sitting in a tavern, who in some minor way could "disturbe" the character, but so far has no relation to the story and is actually just a simple flavor NPC? Picking up a real fight might can certainly be a reasonable behavior for a real troublemaker. But what is the point with that? The other players are not involved (possibly already already gone to bed, or whatever) and the player's character can only lose (being wounded), but not gain anything.
A player taking an action (which is going to take at least half an hour real time), just because he feels that he has to bring a flaw into play, cannot be blamed, but there must be something wrong with the flaw system.

bensei wrote: 1. SAs:
From my experience as player they are a great element for deciding what to do.
Related to the issue of when and under which circumstances to fight an equal opponent, I am not sure about them. Is the number of points in a particular SA a rating for the importance to the player? If yes, how can investing points for character improvement be explained? If no, I get in trouble when my character should pick up a fight and when not. He hates the Scyla family, but when he engages a good fighter one of them, fight or not fight? Just 1 point in the SA or 4 or 5 points in the SA makes a huge difference. Does the character "know" or "feel" how many points are in the SA? Etc. Lots of open questions...

2. Flaws, Gifts, etc. which relate to character behavior:
My point of view on this issue (may be repetative in some instances):
How should a player with the "troublemaker" flaw behave when he meets someone sitting in a tavern, who in some minor way could "disturbe" the character, but so far has no relation to the story and is actually just a simple flavor NPC? Picking up a real fight might can certainly be a reasonable behavior for a real troublemaker. But what is the point with that? The other players are not involved (possibly already already gone to bed, or whatever) and the player's character can only lose (being wounded), but not gain anything.
A player taking an action (which is going to take at least half an hour real time), just because he feels that he has to bring a flaw into play, cannot be blamed, but there must be something wrong with the flaw system.

A player taking an action (which is going to take at least half an hour real time), just because he feels that he has to bring a flaw into play, cannot be blamed, but there must be something wrong with the flaw system.

Mike Holmes wrote: There are two general styles of play we're looking at here. In one, the player looks at the in-game situation and thinks, "Hmm, my character would do X." And then he declares that the character is doing that.

In the other mode the player thinks, "Hmm. It would be cool for the story to do X. Is that something that I can explain my character doing?" And then he does the cool thing if it's plausible. Or finds a way to make it plausible.

What I would suggest is dropping the first mindset.

Why should the player let his character act as troublemaker?

Also remember that the flaws don't necessarily have to be played out in real time. They can be thought of largely as a reputation that the character develops during all of those life moments that aren't played out in actual play.

Think of the many Western movies where the lone gunman rides into town, does nothing but order a drink at the bar when the sheriff comes up and says "we don't want your kind here, this is a nice peaceful town, we've got no use for troublemakers".

So if you have the trouble maker flaw, you have the reputation for being a trouble maker and the GM can enforce all of the social implications that having that reputation means. But the only time the player actually needs to play out his reputation as anything more than mere scene color is on those occassions where it coincides with SAs...

...or perhaps those times when it conflicts with another PCs SAs. Imagine here a PC with an SA passion for Lady Jessica. Lady Jessica's brother is nearby trying to ascertain whether the PC is worthy of his sister. Trouble maker PC chooses that moment to stir up trouble. Now you have the PC's loyalty to another PC pitted against the PC's own Passion SA...a really powerful moment with really powerful potential for roleplaying.

But you don't need to harass every random peasant just because you have the troublemaker flaw, any more than you have to seduce every random barmaid just because you have the Lecherous flaw. You may have the reputation for doing those things...but it isn't necessary to play them all out. Just the important SA effecting ones (like when the lecherous PC starts hitting on Lady Jessica).

Good point, Ralph. Also, the GM should be looking for opportunities to have Flaws and SAs coincide. Again, it's just another indicator from the player to the GM about the sort of action he'd like to see.

IOW, don't take a flaw and then try to avoid the things that make it come out. Sure the character might avoid them, but the player should find ways to get the character into the appropriate sort of trouble left and right. As such, take the flaws that fit the character concept that you want to play.

Mike

In themselves the physchological flaws shouldn't merit extra inspiration points. They are vices, a tragic hubris that prevents the character from achieving greater things.

Indirectly however they often lead to consequences which points can be earned in at least the undefined SAs. A point or two in luck is very appropiate for a troublemaker who plays fate a little bit more than he should. Even conscience might be earned out of a character succumbing to their vices, should they play out a sense of regret afterwards.