Quote from: SpikeIncorrect, sir. You obviously have not read the fucking game you are defending so vigorously, or my previous posts on the subject. TROS has a Seneschal.

Seneschal, Dungeon Master, Storyteller, Game Master, same.. damn.. thing.

QuoteOf course, I at least did you the courtesy of identifying the trivial and inconsequential similarities for you in my post.  Since you did not, I must be forced therefore to assume that you consider the areodynamic properties of the game books, specifically in relationship to monkeys, to be equally valid points in regards to an identical character creation system and a nearly identicle task resolution mechanic... i.e. Dice pools with numbers of success being important and floating target numbers. Only the number of sides is different.

Nope, I just think that your comparison is utterly absurd, and your defense of it downright petulant.  There's much more to a system, and VASTLY more to a roleplaying game as a whole than basic dice mechanics, and I think you're getting so lost in trying to state that there is little truly original in TRoS, a point I agree on, by the way, that you've just tossed aside any sense of perspective, and have slipped into "OMG!  I've gotta win an internet argument and save face!" mode.  But hey, have a blast with it!

Quote from: ScaleThere's much more to a system, and VASTLY more to a roleplaying game as a whole than basic dice mechanics,

Really? Leaving aside the roleplaying game as a collective whole you honestly think that RPG SYSTEMS are more than the sum of their dicerolling and character creation?


Facinating.


Of course, talking about a whole, I consider the game to be equally the group I game with, so unless TROS ships with a box full of new players highly trained to teach me the one true way, right there I could argue that at least that much is in common with Shadowrun, or any other game.


Or I could simply claim you lost perspective.  Hey, it's good for the goose, so Its gotta be good for the Gander.


'Cause y'know, I got no face to save here.  When I first got into the mechanics of the book I kept saying to myself.. oh yeah, I saw that in Shadowrun.... and I could explain large portions of the system to former shadowrun players the same way.  

So instead of trying to simply dismiss me, or make spurious... absurd, comparisons, why don't you try to tell me how the system is so very different?  

And if you are gonna say somethign about 'system is irrelevant to the true meaning of Riddle of Steel' then I'll tell you to play it in GURPS.   'Cause I hate to break it to you, but TROS is about 90% system, and the 10% setting is stretched into filler territory.

Quote from: SpikeReally? Leaving aside the roleplaying game as a collective whole you honestly think that RPG SYSTEMS are more than the sum of their dicerolling and character creation?

Umm, Spike. I haven't read the whole book, but the parts I did read were very different than Shadowrun. Even setting aside the obvious difference in time period, the combat for example is very, very different. Starting with the initiative system in combat. It is indeed a relatively complex rule sets, as are say Shadowrun 3 rules (at least the ones written in the book, not nessasarily the ones that actually got used by people playing the game) but that's a bit like saying fighter jets are humans.  Because they are both complex and use the oxygenation of hydrocarbons to power their locomotion.

It is as absurd as the claims that SR4 suddenly became nWoD just because it switched to using fixed TN dice pools. :rolleyes:

Well, Spike isn't the only one who can see some similarities. Especially the character generation is very, very reminiscant of Shadowrun. I know of no other  rule set with the same priority-based system.

Then there's the dice pool with varying target numbers and "combat pools". Shadowrun is probably the root for some of these mechanisms, it just didn't turn out as unifyed or organised (gee, did I just call SR <4 organized?).

Quote from: SosthenesWell, Spike isn't the only one who can see some similarities. Especially the character generation is very, very reminiscant of Shadowrun. I know of no other  rule set with the same priority-based system.

I don't doubt that there are elements borrowed from or inspired by SR. It also wouldn't surprise me if Norwood was a SR grognard, or at least comfortable with SR1-3's predisposition for people that think "doing calculus while high is a good time". But the whole? It decidely isn't Shadowrun. For example SR has Fireballs and the like, and from what I gather that's pretty much the antithesis of TRoS.

I'm pretty sure I've seen priority type systems elsewhere, although not quite as close to matching SR's (I'm trying to recall the name exactly, "Gray" something or other is what is sticking in my head). And the popularity in using the priority system in SR took a serious dive when the Shadowrun Companion came out with BP, from what i've seen of players at DSF it wasn't a whole lot more popular than use of the entirely 3rd party BeCKS. But once again when you start putting it in the context of the whole. It's like saying M&M or Spycraft 2.0 is just D&D, which are even closer together. Which is just silly.