Zornhau Forums

I was floating around on 4chan's /tabletop games board and saw a TROS thread. Imagine my surprise when I saw people talking about us!

I wound up saying hi and giving an impromptu interview Q&A. While the thread is still live (probably won't be for long), you can check it out here:
http://boards.4chan.org/tg/thread/35950128

If that 404s, you can also check the full archive of the discussion here;
https://archive.moe/tg/thread/35950128

Very nice to read. I would have gone mad about all the rubbish that has been posted in the background

I would have asked if you planned to have any advantagas for not wearing armor other than having a die or two more than an armored enemy by the way...

It's 4chan. You expect a substantial amount of background rubbish.

As for lightly armored combatants, we've been considering giving a fairly nice advantage to those wearing combatants wearing say, a gambeson or leathers in terms of maneuverability in Positioning Rolls, but we haven't settled on whether that is a core mechanic or should be an optional Lever. There was also discussion of a lever that gives a die bonus for going completely unarmored, likely to be called "Swashbuckler" or something. But like all levers, it's completely optional and meant to be used for a certain style of game.

Answers were great and somehow I think I learned something new about the game. Too bad the thread degenerated at the end...

EinBein wrote:I would have asked if you planned to have any advantagas for not wearing armor other than having a die or two more than an armored enemy by the way...

Oh man, Agamemnon beat me to it. I was going to say:

Agamemnon wrote:There was also discussion of a lever that gives a die bonus for going completely unarmored, likely to be called "Swashbuckler" or something.

That sounds pretty cool.

I have to admit that I hadn't known 4chan before...

Edit: I hadn't known SoS either, but after downloading their 1.7 Beta rulebook I like the idea of BoB of being "simple" much more...

EinBein wrote:I hadn't known SoS either

I still feel weird when I see that acronym referring to anything else than Song of Steel.

higgins wrote:

EinBein wrote:I hadn't known SoS either

I still feel weird when I see that acronym referring to anything else than Song of Steel.

Maybe I'm just too proud and stubborn, but I have a hard time abbreviating Song of Swords as anything other than SoSwo. We may have changed our name, but I just can't bring myself to give them the acronym. Not yet, anyway. Not yet..

EinBein wrote:Edit: I hadn't known SoS either, but after downloading their 1.7 Beta rulebook I like the idea of BoB of being "simple" much more...

They had a very specific vision of what they wanted, but for me TROS was already something of a nightmare to keep track of all the book-keeping. That someone saw it and thought "I'd like to add more crunch" is impressive to me. Not in a negative way, I'm legitimately impressed by the kind of dedication to crunch that takes. If/when they get it in its release version and running like a well-oiled machine, I'd like to sit in on someone playing it sometime and see how all of their fiddly bits work together in practice.

For me, I'm not afraid of some crunch, but I hate book-keeping. I can handle systems themselves being complicated in principle, provided their application is simple and direct. The more I have to stop and look something up in the game, the less happy I am with it. So for 'Bastards, we wanted to keep charts and modifiers at a minimum, and so far I think we've done a decent job with it.

Agamemnon wrote:Maybe I'm just too proud and stubborn, but I have a hard time abbreviating Song of Swords as anything other than SoSwo.

Same here. And... during the initial name-clash, we both were known to consciously drop the w when referring to it. After we decided to change our direction, the w has reappeared though.