Grimtooths FAQ für Tunnels & Trolls 7E
In letzter Zeit war Tunnels & Trolls ein Fokus bei Teilzeithelden. Bis zur Veröffentlichung der Deluxe Edition sind die Regeln der Edition 7.5 die aktuellsten, es sei denn man spricht Französisch. Grimtooth hat für die Veröffentlichung der 8. Edition zusammen mit Ken St. Andre einige Regel-Errata herausgebracht (hier als verlinktes PDF). Sie wurden bereits im kostenlosen TrollsZine! 5 abgedruckt, weil sie allerdings so wichtig sind, habe ich sie hier noch einmal aufgeführt. Besteht Interesse an einer Übersetzung?
Anbei noch einmal der Text von Grrraall:
While translating the 7th Edition T&T rulebook into French, I noticed a few inconsistencies and ambiguities which led me to ask Ken St. Andre for clarifications.
Leprechauns – Page 28 (7E and 7.5E)
Leprechauns are all Wizards. They also have a natural Wink-Wing spell they can do without any magical training.
This spell is nowhere to be seen in the new rulebook. However, page 83 reads Leprechauns can teleport themselves short distances which is much more correct. The indication about Leprechauns on page 28 could therefore be changed to: Leprechauns are all Wizards. They also have a natural magical ability to teleport themselves up to 50’ in any direction for a WIZ cost of only 5 points. The 5 points cost rule is taken from the 5th edition Wink-Wing spell.
Rogues and Spells – Page 11 (7E and 7.5E)
Each Rogue may start play knowing any one 1st- level Wizard spell; he must have a sufficiently high Intelligence score to cast any spell, just as a Wizard.
- Maybe one should add that the same goes for the DEX requirement?
- How does the Rogue learn that one spell?
Yes, that’s exactly right. The Rogue can learn and use any spell for which he has the necessary INT, WIZ, and DEX. This is also true for Wizards, but since they learn magic a bit differently, they are more hung up on the concept of levels than rogues are. When Wizards cast spells above their level, it costs them extra Kremm (i.e. WIZ) (was STR in 5th edition). They pay a little extra for the ability to exceed the boundaries. Rogues don’t even see or understand the boundaries—they just know that X effect requires Y effort.
As was put more clearly in Andreas Davour’s list:
The rogue only learns a spell at the level he is taught. Teach him a first level TTYF, and that’s what he knows. You’d have to teach him a separate 2nd level TTYF for him to cast at a higher level.
Wizards and Weapons – Page 15 (7E and 7.5E)
Wizards receive little weapon training as children. They are limited to only weapons that deal a base 2D6 damage or less (plus weapon adds) in combat; if they wield any other weapon, they lose their combat adds and become so distracted that they cannot cast any spells while using the wrong type of weapon.
1) Does it mean that a wizard can cast a spell while using the right type of weapon (like a sax)? My wizard could cast a TTYF spell while using his sax during the same round?
2) In addition, maybe one could add here that the deluxe staff is the exception to that rule (however you interpret it). Remember that
because of its indestructibility and extreme hardness, a deluxe staff gets 4D6 in combat
(Monsters & Magic Book, page 17).
Yes, a wizard could wield a sax and cast a spell at the same time (…) – not literally simultaneously, but within the same 2 minute combat round.
I then asked him:
Mm. And if my wizard (who has used up almost all his WIZ points) picks up a bullova from a corpse, he could fight with it but would then lose his personal adds, right?
Specialist Mage – Page 16 (7E and 7.5E)
A Specialist Mage, who casts a certain kind of spells, doesn’t have to be taught by the Wizards’ Guild. When her abilities reach the point where she could learn a spell, it unfolds in her mind like a flower.
When a 2nd-level combat mage specialist attains sufficient INT and DEX to cast Blasting Power (a 4th-level spell) and he thinks about casting it, then the ability to do so will blossom within him. If he does it once, he has it forever more – that is, as long as his INT and DEX support it.
I asked Ken if a Specialist Mage should also be able to master combat spells listed in other supplements (as long as his INT and DEX are sufficient to cast them).
No such thing as too powerful in T&T. Get over this concept of play balance – it’s holding you back.
Rangers – Page 18 (7E and 7.5E)
Rangers and Leaders have magical abilities (…). They should be played as Rogues or Citizens more than Wizards (unlike Specialist Mages, who are thought of as Wizards, and Warrior-Rangers, who are treated as gifted warriors).
Logically, either the part, and Warrior-Rangers, who are treated as gifted warriors should be deleted or the part Rangers and should be deleted. You could also consider that you have the option of regarding the Ranger either as a sort of Rogue or as a sort of warrior.
This has implications for the Ranger’s level attribute. According to the table on page 37, the Ranger’s level attributes are those of a Specialist, i.e. CON, INT, WIZ, and CHR.
Rangers’ abilities – Page 120 (7E) or 173 (7.5E)
The description of Rangers on p. 17 states: A Ranger has to make only Level One Saving Rolls to hit any target within range, and he always rolls on DEX for ranged attacks. (He cannot take an Archery Talent to improve on his natural ability.) He only misses if he fails the SR.
On page 120 (173), however, it is specified that
starting characters get one Talent only – in the case of Rogues (Roguery), Leaders (Leadership), and Rangers (Missile Mastery) – these talents are pre-determined. These characters can select a second Talent when they advance to their next level.
While I find that this rule is fair as far as Rogues are concerned (the Roguery talent is very useful and Rogues get other advantages as well, like the ability to use any weapon and one free Level 1 spell), in the case of the Ranger I find that their ability to hit any target within range whenever they make a L1SR on DEX is not enough. Can the Ranger also use a sword or a morningstar? Does he have an armor bonus (twice the normal protection)? Does he get one ADD per level like the warrior? In other words, is the Ranger a Warrior Plus, with all the normal warrior’s abilities plus the Missile Mastery Talent? Or, can the Ranger be a Rogue instead, at the player’s option? [see also the discussion above on page 18].
One may think that the Ranger should simply be treated as a Specialist Warrior who enjoys the same benefits that Warriors have, plus an extraordinary ability to hit any target within range. If this is the case, it would not be fair to let them have a talent in addition to their archery ability.
However, should the rangers not be treated as warriors, this ability would be the sole benefit they enjoy, at the exclusion of any combat or armor bonus; in that case, I feel that they should start at least with one talent in addition to their archery ability.
The same argument also applies to the Leader.
Therefore, either one has to assume that Rangers are a subdivision of Warriors (and Leaders would be a subdivision of Rogues) and get their marksmanship (or persuasion for leaders) ability instead of their starting talent, or one considers that they are a subdivision of the Specialist class, in which case they should at least get one starting talent in addition to their specialist ability. Also, in the latter case, are they allowed to use any weapon?
The Ranger is a specialist, great with missile weapons, but he doesn’t get the warrior’s extra armor protection.
Acquiring Talents – Page 7 (7E and 7.5E)
When you first create a character, limit it to a single Talent. As the character grows in experience, it may develop other Talents.
Yes, except that it has now become possible to create a character that begins at Level 3 since levels depend on attributes which are determined subject to the TARO (triples add and roll over) rule.
Example: when rolling the attributes of Garmanax the Mad, you roll 3, 3 and 3 for his DEX. Because of the TARO rule, you roll again and get 2, 2 and 2. You roll again and obtain 1, 5 and 2. Garmanax has therefore a DEX of 9+6+8=23. You choose to make him a Hobb. Hobbs get an attribute modifier of 1.5 for DEX. The rules state that Fractions are expressed as decimals and round up to the next integer when figuring an attribute value (page 28). Garmanax has now a DEX of 23×1.5=35. You decide that Garmanax will be a Rogue. Since DEX is a level attribute for Rogues, Garmanax is a 3rd level Rogue from the outset because his DEX is between 30 and 39 (see page 37 of the rulebook).
One should keep in mind that characters get one talent per level. If a new character starts at level 3, he can chose up to 3 talents. Of course, you can choose to save 2 talents for later, when the need arises.
The statement on page 32 (New characters may choose a single Talent. When they go up a level, they may add another Talent.) should be changed in order to make it clear that you get one talent per level.
It is agreed that each T&T character, player or NPC alike, is entitled to have one Talent per level. Remember: there is a part in the written rules that suggest that new players start with one, and save the others for situations when they might need an unusual talent. Thus: the character is faced with a sheer rock cliff between him and his escape from an approaching hoard of wild pigs. His Talent of Persuasion isn’t going to help much with the wild pigs, and there is no other way out, but the character is 3rd level and hasn’t taken his second and third talent yet. At which point, he turns to the GM, and says, did I ever tell you about my Talent for Rock-Climbing, which is based on my Dexterity? And the GM says, hmmm, DEX of 24, roll 1D6, you got a 4, Rock Climbing Talent of 28. It’s going to take at least a Level 4 Saving Roll to climb this cliff. Make a L4SR on Rock Climbing if you’re thinking what I’m thinking. Player rolls 2D6 on Rock Climbing—needs a 7, rolls a 3, 2. “Ack! I missed it”, he cries. “But wait”, says the G.M. “It looks like you missed it, but did you add your 3 levels of experience to the roll? That makes an 8. You nearly fall off several times, but you do manage to scramble at the top, leaving the horde of wild pigs milling angrily below you”.
Rogues’ Talents – Page 32 (7E and 7.5E)
Let’s say I’ve just made a new character, Zam the Bony, a Rogue, and I want him to be a thievish sort. Thus I choose Thievery his main Talent. Whenever Zam the Bony is in a situation where he must steal something, or know something about how to steal things, he will use this Thievery Talent to determine success or failure.
Normally, all rogues start with a Roguery Talent (page 11) so Zam is an exception since he starts with a Thievery Talent instead.
In addition, Ken wrote on page 120:
Q. Do Rogues, Leaders and Rangers get a Talent in addition to the Type Talent that they start out with?
A. No. Starting characters get one Talent only – in the case of Rogues („Roguery“), Leaders („Leadership“) and Rangers („Missile Mastery“) – these talents are pre-determined. These characters can select a second Talent when they advance to their next level.
That implies that it is allowed to replace the Roguery Talent by another Talent when creating a Rogue. Personally, I tend to think that the special Roguery Talent is broad (and undefined) enough to encompass Thievery.
Ken said that
Roguery is a broader talent than Thievery (…) and the two are not synonymous. (…) rogues can have 2 talents to begin if they wish. Call it a class bonus.
I found this answer very puzzling since it contradicts the previously mentioned statement you can find in the FAQ on page 120, according to which Rogues start with only one talent (Roguery), but is compatible with the example of Zam the Bony (page 32), who has Thievery as his “main Talent” (maybe that example should be slightly altered to make things clearer?).
I asked Ken to indicate his final choice on this point.
You’re right. There is some contradiction, but there can be rogues who aren’t thieves. Perhaps it’s not a good example. We could make Zam the Bony a thieving Warrior.
Talent increases – Page 39 (7E)
Talent increases: There is another bonus for character levels, and this one applies to Talents. Every time a character raises an attribute by 1 point, and that attribute is the base attribute of that character’s talent, then the talent also increases by an amount equal to the character’s level. For example, Gimor has Dexterity 14 and it’s the base attribute for his Acrobatic Talent of 16. Gimor is 3rd level, having gradually increased his STR to 31. In time, he accumulates another 1400 AP and decides to raise his DEX by 1 point, increasing it to 15. When he does that, he also automatically raises his Acrobatics Talent to 16 + 3 (he’s 3rd level) = 19.
The rule for talent advancement is messed up. Talents = base level plus the 1D6 rule. Bring up your base attribute, and you bring up your talent.
Thus, in the example on page 39, Gimor’s Acrobatic Talent of 16 (which is based on his DEX) should be raised by 1 point when his DEX is raised by 1 point, no matter what his level is. Under the new rule, talent increases with the base attribute, not with the level of the character. I wrote the French version of the T&T rulebook with that in mind.
That 7th edition rule is too complicated. That is why I changed it in 7.5. Your second paragraph is what should be in there. [“If I understand you right, in your example on page 39, Gimor’s Acrobatic Talent of 16 (which is based on his DEX) should be raised by 1 point when his DEX is raised by 1 point, no matter what his level is. Under your new rule, talent increases with the base attribute, not with the level of the character”]. The rule should be deleted entirely. Talent goes up or down with the attribute it’s based on. That’s all. Neth McCrom has Persuasion at INT. If INT goes up, so does his Persuasion. If it goes down, so does his Persuasion.
Weapons and Armor
Armor and DEX – Page 29 (7E and 7.5E)
Shields count as armor although they require minimal Strength and Dexterity to wield. However, this minimum DEX requirement is nowhere to be seen in the ARMOR AND SHIELDS table (pages 61 et seq.).
Weapons and tools – Pages 44 & 55 (7E and 7.5E)
The sledgehammer is listed both under Tools and Hafted Weapons. Under Tools, it is listed as costing 90 SP while under Hafted Weapons, it is listed as costing 90 GP (Noted by Mike Eidson aka Khaydhaik). In the French version, it costs 9 GP under both lists. Not a very elegant weapon, but good value. The woodman’s axe is also listed both under Tools and Hafted Weapons. Under both lists it cost 70 SP (or 7 GP) and weighs 100 w.u. (see pp. 44&54 in 7E and 7.5E).
Swordbreaker – Page 48 (7E and 7.5E)
The footnote about the swordbreaker, which you could see in the previous version, has disappeared from version 7 and was replaced in the French version.
Ranged weapons – Page 51 (7E and 7.5E)
In bows and other ranged weapons, one should add the note found in the previous edition that states in particular that
all arbalests and similar crossbows require 1 combat turn to reload with the exception of the dokyu or repeating crossbow. The dokyu [over-and- under in v. 7] will only fire 1 round [sic: quarrel?] per combat turn, but does not need a turn to reload until all 5 rounds [quarrels?] are fired.
Since the dokyu has been replaced by the over- and- under, clarification is needed on the following point. The over-and-under is defined as
essentially two crossbows stacked on top of each other that allow two shots before reloading is required
(though it takes twice as long to reload as well). Logically, those 2 shots could happen in the same combat round. The player has also the possibility to fire once on the first round and then once again on the second round.
Bolas – Page 52 (7E and 7.5E)
The Hunting Bola has no explanation for its use in 7th edition, unlike in 5.x. In 5th edition, the bolas entangle if the thrower’s DEX is greater than 15, or 50% of the time if the thrower’s DEX is 8-15. They entangle a foe for one combat turn. The War Bola does no damage if it does not entangle.
Throwing stars – Pages 53 & 60 (7E and 7.5E)
There seems to be 2 kinds of throwing stars:
- page 53: Throwing stars (3) 4D STR2 DEX10 30gp 10u 10y
- page 60: Throwing stars (10) 1D+3 STR10 DEX15 50gp 5u 15y
The combat dice and adds seem to apply to every single throwing star, which would mean that you have either 3 big throwing stars with 4 dice each and 10 little throwing stars with 1+3.
The kind listed on page 53 are heavier and do more damage (…) At the very least they need distinguishing names. Page 53 should be razor rings (…) Page 60 should be small 5-pointed stars of bronze.
I asked Ken if you could throw several shurikens at the same time and if so how many.
This might be a good place to require saving rolls on DEX before allowing it. Trying to throw 2 at a time would require a L2SR on DEX –throwing 4 would require a L4SR on DEX and so forth. If you miss the saving roll, you missed with everything.
Throwing axe – Page 54 (7E and 7.5E)
The throwing axe should have a range of 10 yards.
Long Spears – Page 57 (7E and 7.5E)
There is an inconsistency between the weapons’ glossary, according to which a long spear cannot be thrown, and the weapons’ table, where you find that the long spear can be thrown (range: 10 yards).
Gunnes – Page 61 (7.5E)
Rifling is in the Gunnes table, but has no explanation. From the 5th edition,
Rifling for muskets…increases the price of the weapon by a factor of 3. Rifling will improve the performance of the weapon at medium and far range by 1 and 2 saving rolls respectively on marksmanship to hit.
Level bonus for SRs – Page 38 (7E and 7.5)
But wait – Luck is a level attribute for Warriors! Gimor is therefore entitled to add 1 to that failed roll to see if he can pull off a success. (7E)
But wait! Luck is a level attribute for Warriors: Gimor is a first level character and therefore entitled to add 1 to every saving roll attempted (7.5)
The statement that Luck is a level attribute for Warriors should be erased, because according to page 74 (or page 100 in 7.5)
you can always add your character level to a Saving Roll you’ve failed in order to change that failure to a success.
The first statement [i.e. that “luck is a level attribute for Warriors”] has nothing to do with the situation. Characters are always permitted to add their character level to saving roll attempts—both on attributes and on talents.
Experience for missile SRs – Page 80 (7E) or 105 (7.5E)
Under the previous version of the rules (section 2.33.2)
no experience points should be awarded for saving rolls made to determine hit-or-miss
which is the exact contrary of the example given on page 80 of the 7th edition, where Taran SniperOrc gets AP because he tried to shoot a charging elf (and missed). This may make it somewhat easier to get the AP you now so badly need to increase your attributes.
Missile and magic combat – Page 72 (7E) or 97 (7.5E)
On page 68 of 7E (p. 93 of 7.5E), the rules state that
there have been some slight modifications, especially in missile and magic combat (which is perhaps why Ken suppressed the magic in combat section).
On page 72 of 7E (p. 97 of 7.5E), the rules state that
magic that does damage always counts as part of his side’s HPT, which is a departure from the previous rules. In v. 5, TTYF was almost alone among the available spells in having what is termed a shock effect (see section 2.32.1) and the only two other spells which have any ‘shock value’ and are counted in with the party’s attack are the Blasting Power and Freeze Pleeze. (see section 2.32.2).
The new rules also state under 3. Missile combat that
If you miss the SR, you get no points toward the melee total. If you make it, your points count no matter what.
This wording is ambiguous.
Does it mean that all successful missile shots always count as part of the HPT (like all combat spells)? That would imply that combat spells and missiles all have a shock effect. If that is not the case, maybe one could rephrase the above sentence like this: If you miss the SR, you have dealt no damage and are normally not able to take part to the melee fight (unless you shot from a long distance). On the other hand, if you make the SR, your points directly damage your target (only his armor can protect him, if he’s got any).
Examples would be welcome to illustrate how missile and magic function in combat, particularly during the melee.
Also, the wording of page 72 of v. 7 (Except in unusual circumstances, you only get one missile per combat turn) seems to imply that one can continuously fire missiles (although only once per round) during melee combat. Is that so?
I’m not sure where the confusion comes on this. In hand-to-hand combat, blows miss, armor absorbs damage, weapons are parried – all part of the combat total, but not actually doing any damage. On the other hand, if a combat spell like Blasting Power manages to actually hit the foe, then clearly it has effectiveness on the target and shock effect on the party.
Simplest case: 1 wizard vs. 1 swordsman. Wizard does 3D6 Blasting Power and gets 10 hits on the swordsman. It’s flame so armor doesn’t really help the swordsman who takes 10 points of magic damage. That hurts. The swordsman rolls 3D6 for his own weapon and gets a 12. He has just taken a 10 point shock; that could throw him off a bit (12 – 10 = 2). The wizard takes 2 points of damage. The spell was his defense and offense too.
Likewise with an arrow; when an arrow hits, a certain amount of kinetic energy is transferred. Armor may or may not protect the target, but still x amount of damage has to be accounted for. Of course that has shock effect; as it hampers the other side in combat it has to count as part of the combat total. Except when performing a specific feat, archery should be regarded as a process the same way that swordsmanship is a process. It doesn’t take 2 minutes to launch an arrow. It is easily possible to imagine someone using a missile weapon, even at close quarters, as fast and as often as he could in combat. In such a case, the missile weapon contributes its dice value plus combat adds to the general total, and one doesn’t even have to roll to hit. Or, if you want to be technical, the missiles have to hit something to do any damage – thus the shooter makes a generalized saving roll to see if he’s hitting or not. If he’s hitting, whether the missiles penetrate or not, then the total is part of the combat roll; if he misses then they aren’t. (…) The GM may just have to cope with combat on an individual case by case occurrence and use common sense to come to a conclusion”.
“If I understood you well:
– All combat spells have a shock effect (not only TTYF or Blasting Power) provided that the spell works (kremm resistance rule + SR on INT), and
– Missile weapons can be used during the melee phase of the combat; in that case, they have the same shock effect as a combat spell (provided the target was actually hit).
That is the way I see it. Just go with common sense. If a spell has an energy effect on the combat, it has to be part of the combat total. Same with an arrow; I shoot the arrow into the air and it goes out the window, no effect. I shoot an arrow into a horde of orcs, they see it coming so it has an effect even if it glances off a shield or something. The arrow hits target A who can’t deny that he was hit – he takes x damage. If the arrow has to go through his armor, he gets his armor defense.
Combat adds and missile weapons – Page 68 (7E) or 93 (7.5E)
Whereas strength increases the damage potential when firing an arrow with a bow or when throwing a knife or a chakram, strength should obviously not count towards calculating combat adds when using a firearm or a crossbow.
Strength has little to do with how much damage a firearm does in combat. (…) Neither STR nor SPD should give firearms adds. What you might do, however, is give double LUCK and double DEX adds to those using a firearm.
I also asked him if missile adds still exist under 7E.
No, missile adds have gone away. It no longer seems logical to have them.
Therefore, when firing an arrow with a bow, you should apply normal adds (which depend on your STR, DEX, LK and SPD).
Following the 5th edition rules, in the French rulebook I wrote a sentence under section 1.6.2 saying:
You can always fight with your bare hands. In this case, roll 1 die and then add your Personal Adds.
Remember that all weapons will get you at least 2 dice.
Fighting with two weapons
I included Ken’s rule about using 2 weapons simultaneously: you can use 2 single-handed weapons, provided your STR and DEX are above the combined STR and DEX requirements for both. That rule was explained quite clearly in 4th edition rules and the short version of the T&T rules found for example in Take The Money (a GM adventure written by Ken St. Andre in 2007):
An asterisk (*) indicated a weapon that requires two hands for proper use. [When wielding such a weapon,] You can’t use a second weapon or shield unless you have more than two hands. Two weapons without asterisks may be used simultaneously IF the user has the ST and DEX requirements for BOTH weapons (e.g. to fight with a dirk in each hand requires a minimum ST of 2 [1+1] and a DEX of 8 [4+4]).
I added the rules from 5th edition concerning wielding too-heavy weapons: Each combat turn in which a too- heavy weapon is used, a character weakens at a rate equal to the required strength minus his current strength. This number is taken directly off strength…If a character’s ST drops to exactly 1, he or she will fall unconscious.
However, I changed the minimal STR value since according to the 7th edition rulebook exhaustion happens with a STR of 0 instead of 1 (p. 21).
Dis-Spell – Page 101 (7E) or page 144 (7.5E)
By its very nature, Dis-Spell should read: Power Up? Yes. (see the spell description and 5th edition).
Rock-a-Bye – Page 103 (7E) or page 146 (7.5E)
The Rock-a-Bye spell lists its duration as 1 combat turn, whereas the description of the spell says it lasts for 1D6x10 minutes. According to 5th edition, it should be 1D6x10 minutes, thus 1-6 normal turns. (Noted by Mike Eidson aka Khaydhaik)
Turns and Time – Page 68 (7E) or 93 (7.5E)
It is explained that a combat turn or round lasts officially 2 minutes, but the duration of a normal turn (given as 10 minutes under the 5th edition rules) is not specified. This information is useful to have particularly as far as concerns spells lasting 10 minutes.
Trollworld and Kaball – Page 162 (7.5E)
As I first wrongly assumed, Kaball and Trollworld are not synonyms. Trollworld is the setting used by Ken St. Andre and his friends as it is described in the various T&T products published by Flying Buffalo and in the Crusaders of Khazan computer game (which includes a color map). Both the computer game and the map were included in the T&T 7th edition box sold by Fiery Dragon. There is also another map by Liz Danforth (April/May 1980, B&W). It describes the Lands Explored of Trollworld (western part of the Dragon Continent of Rhalph, just like the Crusaders of Khazan map). The Danforth map is based on maps by Bear Peters, Ken St. Andre, and Mike Stackpole. It was published in Different Worlds #7 (see Ten Days in the Arena of Khazan).
Kaball is an alternate version of Trollworld developed by Jim Shipman back in the days when we were friends. As it is a more complete rendition of Trollworld than my maps, which only cover the Dragon’s head, chest, and forelegs, it came to be published as part of the 7.5E package. Let it be noted that I do not like Kaball very much. It places the city of Khazan on the dragon’s stomach instead of in its mouth, and otherwise re-arranges my geography to suit Shipman’s ideas. While Kaball may be a version of Trollworld, it’s not my version, and I never use that name for my world.