Ok I have found one bad thing about TROS! Whenever I go to play any other roleplaying games now I start comparing it to TROS and ALL of them fall far short. TROS is just too awesome. It makes it hard to play anything else...I think I smell conspiracy :)

Truthfully I love the game to death and I'm sure a good deal of the other people who hang out here also do, but everyone has their issues, things that they think could be a little better. I'm starting this thread for just that reason. I'm looking for constructive criticism not TROS bashing! Please explain your issues so that maybe in the future something can be done about it if it is a valid arguement (Jake and Brian, hopefully this will be beneficial for you guys). I know when I'm a GM and people have gripes about what I'm doing, if I know what it is it can help make me a better GM, or I can just beat the living snot out of their character :)

So without further delay…What issues do you have with TROS?

I have been quite vocal in this forum and others about how much I dig the game. Here are my tiny quibbles:

1) The character creation chapter just isn't tight enough. Racial information for half-siedhe are in the late world section and it makes for alot of page flipping, don't believe the page number is even listed in the character gen section.

2) The Magic chapter is a rough read.

3) It makes running my almost two year old D&D game really tough because I want to be running the Riddle, dammit.

Thanks, fun game.

Paka wrote:

It makes running my almost two year old D&D game really tough because I want to be running the Riddle, dammit.

Thanks, fun game.

Hmmm. Now that somebody has opened the door. I won't debate any of these in this thread as I don't think that's what it's supposed to be for. But if anyone wants to start a new thread on any of these topics, I'd be glad to join in.

1) Skills should be handled like proficiencies. That is, instead of lowering TN, you could just add dice for a larger pool. This would simplify resolution, and make skills just as open-ended as proficiencies. Modifiers to difficulty could still affect the TN. Then all skills and proficiencies couild come from the same pool. Or better yet, proficiencies would be acquired as part of packages. That would be cool. Anyone seen the CRPG Darklands? So, you'd have some number of packages that you'd buy and each would give you X dice in each skill.

2) Just a personal thing, but I would have liked to have seen a finer level of granularity in the system. Yes, this probably means more dice (though there are creative ways around that, too). I like dice; the more the better.

3) As discussed recently, there could have been a lot more done to allow for scale shifts. Basically I'd have liked to see something like damage being divided by TO, rather than TO subtracting. There are ways to do this sans heavy math, but I'm a math-head, and woudn't mind it more complex than it is now.

4) The magic system is not defined in terms of system, but rather in terms of the world. This is a big, big mistake in my book. My preference is to have magic described in terms of what it can do in mechanical terms, and let our imaginations do the rest. For example, after the recent magic item thread, it occurred to me that spells could be done just like that (using SAs) except that they'd likely be temporary. I'd also have toned down the power level. Don't need to be able to shake the firmament daily to inspire fear. In fact done correctly a light spell is awesone to behold. The problem with D&D magic is not that it isn't powerful enough (remember TROS sorcerers don't have to compete against warriors with unrealistically high levels of ability to soak up damage), it's that it's treated as though it were mundane and commonplace.

5) I'd have made SAs more generalized. Essentially, like I describe above with magic, I'd like to just have certain mechanical effects selectable, and then the player ascribes any motive to the effect that they like. So, you have Luck? Well, I have Karma, which works the same but recovers when I do something substantial for somebody else (kinda like Conscience). Player and GM to work out the specific details until they understand each other. (GM still remains arbiter of rewards so he and the player need to have the same expectations). This takes out all value judgements, allowing players to make greyer characters if the GM agrees that this is OK. Grey, to me seems to suit the TROS mood. Conan's no knight in shining armor. And it eliminates the "Which should it be?" and "Does it fit?" problems to a great extent.


Most important to realize here is that I wouldn't have put this kind of thought into the game without liking the basic principles a lot. I seem to want a whole new game in some ways, but I'm leaving the central strengths (as I see them) intact. And, none of these things is a breaker or anything like one. They're just tweaks to an already excellent system.

Mike

Hi, this is my first post here, so go easy...

Not so much a criticism as an alternate suggestion:

I remember reading someone's complaint that a high toughness PC takes ages to kill and dominates their battles. I'm wondering if halving (round up) the strength and toughness values in combat wouldn't fix this. Normally, with 2 evenly matched fighters, strength and toughness will cancel each other out, and this only becomes a problem when weak character hits a tough character and vice versa. Halving the strength and toughness adds would seem to minimise this problem.

Bear in mind I've only been mucking around with the quickstart so far, so this may not be a valid problem, I'm not sure.

Again, like those issue raised above, these are quibbles rather than criticisms.

The way damage ocurs with high stats. And I mean HIGH stats.

This has been discussed in other posts, and I agree. The system falls apart a little when dealing with creatures with enormous str. Once a hit has been scored, iregardless of how bare the success margin was, the blow becomes an instant kill, generating so much damage that a level 5 wound is received. A dragon either hits you or misses. There is no grazing, or catching blows. I realise the system was designed with human combat in mind. But god dammit, I want dragons and giants in my fantasy campaign. And I wanna kill them ;)

There is one way to deal with this. The wound level (once armor, str, weapon damage have all been handled) cannot exceed the success margin. Thus, the guardsman strikes you with his greatsword, but only by two successes. He thus only scores a level 2 wound. Having not thought this through completely, this may well limit the advantage of high damage weapons though. Dunno.


Concerning Mike Holmes' comment regarding SA being too specific. I kidna agree, but as you sorta stated anyway, the system allows itself to be tweaked to such a degree that it can accomodate many kinds of play.

In the example of your conan, for example. Conan has a passion to be free. And a drive to undo tyranny. Thus, though he may not blaze when drunkenly taking down thugs in the pub, all his SAs come to bear when escaping from the evil vizir's lair.

I also reckon the skill system runs fine. I like the idea that mastery of a skill and the ability to achieve a skill are two seperate matters. The young fit man has loads of dice to play with, but is looking at high numbers to succeed. He is in a better position to succeed, but he just finds it tougher. The wizened old kung-fu master has a small margin to play with, but finds success comes easily.

Apologies, another rant. TROS is great.


Take care

Vanguard wrote: There is one way to deal with this. The wound level (once armor, str, weapon damage have all been handled) cannot exceed the success margin. Thus, the guardsman strikes you with his greatsword, but only by two successes. He thus only scores a level 2 wound. Having not thought this through completely, this may well limit the advantage of high damage weapons though. Dunno.

No qualms with TROS here. Been running the game for over 6 months, and it has been more than great.

It actually seems pretty appropriate to me. Even a grazing wound from a dragon is enough to kill a human. I've not actually had the situation, so I can't speak from experience, though. I suppose if it were a particularly heroic occasion, I might allow SAs to be used to soak damage.. Or better yet, they could be used to avoid being hit entirely.

Wolfen wrote: It actually seems pretty appropriate to me. Even a grazing wound from a dragon is enough to kill a human. I've not actually had the situation, so I can't speak from experience, though. I suppose if it were a particularly heroic occasion, I might allow SAs to be used to soak damage.. Or better yet, they could be used to avoid being hit entirely.

That's my reckoning. Comics and D&D aside, unless you're really lucky, something like a dragon hits you and you're dead or you got missed. "But wait!" You say, "not every hit has to kill!" To which I agree. If the dragon hits an arm and it's a Bash attack (like w/ the tail or back-hand), then your arm is just horribly shattered. Sounds right to me. I can't think of a "realistic" (there goes that word again) situation where a DRAGON would hit a human with intent to kill and the human wouldn't be in the worst shape of his life, assuming he lived.

My pet peeve in TROS...hmmm... I would like to streamline a few things. Not exactly like what Mike wants, but in principle the idea is the same.

Jake

Mike Holmes wrote: 1) Skills should be handled like proficiencies. That is, instead of lowering TN, you could just add dice for a larger pool. This would simplify resolution, and make skills just as open-ended as proficiencies. Modifiers to difficulty could still affect the TN. Then all skills and proficiencies couild come from the same pool. Or better yet, proficiencies would be acquired as part of packages. That would be cool. Anyone seen the CRPG Darklands? So, you'd have some number of packages that you'd buy and each would give you X dice in each skill.

Mike

1. TROS is probably going to spoil me for other games. Reduce its fun at once.

2. What is the point of larger shields? The DTN doesn't lower, it doesn't seem to cover more (see point 3).

3. What armour covers isn't clearly detailed.

4. For newbies, an example of how to run a basic I hack you, you hack me fight. I found it hard to get to this point.

That's about it...ooh, yes...KEWL POWERZ, not enough of them!

I hope Noon is joking about Kewl powerz.

However, i agree, the fun level of TROS must be reduced immediately! :-P

The character generation should be condensed so it is easier to put one together. However, i solved this particular issue by creating my own package. Very compact, only 8 pages.

And that packet is really nice, too. I want to put it on the site, but I feel like it's too much of the game for free when matched up with the rest of the downloads. A "members' page" maybe...

Jake

Ooh, ooh, I wanna throw in my two cents.

Okay, the only problems I really have with TRoS are the skill system and the layout.

True, the skill system works, on the human level, but if you start having super skill people, like, say, a thousand year old elf craftsman, the system starts to break down. I also think having a unified resolution system (ability + skill) makes for a more elegant system. I'm not saying it should be Godlike (I'm a big fan of slick systems. But then, I'm also a big fan of 'The right system for the right setting'), but the system would be easier to learn and more robust if you pared down the mechanics.

All in all, the mechanics themselves are really flexible.

As for the layout of the book, I'm sure that the second edition will be much more readable.
I'd also like to see seperate magic systems in the main book. TRoS would fit my group's upcoming campaign perfectly, but the GM built it around the D&D style spell system. The magic is cool, but I have the feeling most groups will avoid it.

All in all, I think that TRoS could be adapted to any realistic/ dangerous setting. In fact, I think I'll just write up some sort of Essence of TRoS, just to see if I can adapt it to be used in a modern fashion.

-Gurk-
Jon the Bastard