I came across this game after a friend introduced me to it, and it looks really solid. As someone who tried making an RPG a while back that attempted to cover similar ground, you did a much better job handling these systems/ideas than I did. I particularly like the way that healing, endurance, rations, and travel all tie in together. I think that's a really elegant way of handling things. I also think your system for random stat generation is great, and strikes a good balance between providing random outcomes without being a slog.
I do have one point I'm not clear on though, and that's the game's general approach to combat. Trespasser seems to be taking the approach of a lot of OSR-influenced games where combat is something that should be actively avoided wherever possible, and that when a party has the choice between resolving something with or without combat they should always pick the latter (that's how I interpreted the first paragraph on pg 27, at least). It then goes on to provide a quite in-depth and tactical combat system, which I think is interesting, but it also seems at sort of at odds with that previous point. I'm not sure I understand the design intent here. Why would you spend time elaborating rules for something you want the players to not do?
My view has always been that the amount of space a game allocates to providing rules for something should correlate with how often it expects you to be doing that thing while playing. For example, consider a hypothetical game that spends 3/4 of its page count on combat and magic, and only two pages on crafting. I would interpret that to mean the game expects you to spend most of your time either in combat or working with magic, and that craft-ing is a niche activity that will come up only rarely if at all. It sounds like that may not be the model you're working under. I would be grateful for any clarifications you could provide.
This is a great point! You've arrived at the conventional wisdom that I am trying to challenge with the project. Conventional wisdom says that "combat as sport" a la 4E and "combat as war" a la OSR are fundamentally at odds, and I think you've articulated that very well.
I don't necessarily think that is the case. Even in OSR games, combat is not always avoidable. Engaging with the combat system is necessary for progression: treasure and experience are often locked behind nasty encounters, enemies will rise up to present themselves as an existential threat that will need to be dealt with, etc. So I'd say, OSR isn't telling you not to fight, it's telling you to choose your battles wisely and try to give yourself every advantage before the dice start flying.
Trespasser is trying to do the same. Even victorious battles are costly, and victory should be carefully weighed against the benefits of avoiding a fight entirely. it doesn't expect you never to fight, it expects you to have discernment about when you engage, instructing you to choose your battles carefully. It even provides a retreat mechanic to facilitate this.
I think the paragraph you reference is intended for players coming to the game from 5E or other more heroic games, where they are expected to say yes to whatever battle the DM puts in front of them and fight it to the finish. That advice to pick your fights carefully is meant to be a clue that in a player-driven game, not every battle will be meaningful or necessary, and the party will have to be judicious about when it is worth it to fight. The Judge and the game will not make that decision for them.
This is often the first thing people wonder when they look at Trespasser, so I'm glad you've given me an opportunity to talk about it a bit! I often describe the goal of combining tactical combat with OSR principles as a "peanut butter and tuna fish" sandwich. My goal is to make that sandwich delicious, as stupid an idea as it is! 😁 It's been a great design problem at the heart of this experiment that has kept me interested in it a lot longer than I thought I would be! But I think Trespasser has struck a good chord in the current edition.
And to add just a little more context, I started out making this game for my table, who always felt that OSR didn't have enough to grab on to to keep them interested. We all really like picking character options and moving miniatures around a table, but I wanted to try and prove that you could still enjoy that in the context of a player-driven, old school style game!
Thank you for giving an in-depth response. I think I better understand what you were trying to go for with the game. I look forward to trying it out when I get the chance.
"Dark fantasy D&D 4e" has me obsessed; right up my alley. I've been running 4e weekly for over a year now, and this addresses a lot of the little stumbling blocks I've experienced with it.
I love what this game is offering. I've been reading through the pdf over the last few days, and my friend and I tried it out on a whim today, which admittedly was not the best way to see the game in motion for the first time, but I definitely could see myself playing and running more of this.
One major mechanical question that came up: a character can only attempt one deed per turn, but the Wait action ends your turn and lets you take a second turn in the late phase of the combat round. Does that mean you can use a deed in the early phase, Wait, then use another deed during your secondary turn in the late phase? My instinct was that wasn't the intended interaction, but as-written that does seem like a valid strategy.
Thank you for checking out the game and for pointing this out- that definitely needs a clarification! Rules as intended, you are only meant to attempt one deed per turn; the Wait action is meant to let you put your turn 'on hold' and then finish it in the late phase, not grant you another turn- the language of that action is currently misleading! I'll try to catch it in the next update.
Hello. I've been reading the book and I must honestly say it is the first OSR game I'm excited to play. Our monday gaming group may in fact play the new 2.0 edition as our next campaign in week after next. I'm hoping to play Earth Craft using Conjurer, since messing with obstacles and breaking them for a blast sounds very fun, and terrain manipulation is good control thing.
I would however like to mention that at few places the calling names are wrong. On Page 88 the table lists "magician" instead of "conjuror", and page 109 has "improve core features as a brigand" despite the calling being marauder. These are very minor things, but I figured I mention them in case such may be of help.
Aaron Lawrance is responsible for the cover art and some interior pieces (the Marauder, the knight at the start of the Callings chapter). The rest is public domain art.
Hey! I wanted to ask a question about the first day. When the players are controlling multiple characters, are you supposed to bring all those characters into combat when it occurs?
That seems to be the intent, just making sure I don't accidentally run a combat that's way more complex than it's supposed to be.
Hi, there are actually a couple pages about running the First Day that I forgot to put back in. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I will add them to the document in the next hotfix!
In general, if players are running multiple characters, they do bring all of them into combat and control all of them. Level ones can only make weapon attacks and take default actions, so it gives everyone a chance to practice using the fundamentals of the game before the other layers of complexity kick in.
This is the first TTRPG thing I've ever bought. I love this idea. And this line, "You don't get to choose where you came from, but you do get to choose who you become." As a person who changed their careers, from journalist/photographer to truck driver/logistics, I get this line.
Kudos to you- I've also moved between career paths before, and I've worked in logistics too! I'm glad the game spoke to you, and thank you for the post!
Contradictory, definitely! Two great tastes that go questionably together. It's a wacky experiment and I never expected it to find an audience, but I'm happy to learn there are others like me! New version is coming soon, keep an eye out :)
Yeah actually my life situation changed big time over the summer, and I've had time to work on it steadily. Playtest Version 2.0 will be a big overhaul of core systems. It will retain use of the d20, but attributes, skills, fatigue, effort and other derived stats are all being retooled. There are full procedural rules now for governing the four timeframes of play (combat, dungeon exploration, travel/camping, and stronghold turns). The combat system has been reworked in a number of important ways, too, with a three-action system to clarify and simplify turns, a new peril system to create escalating tension in combat, reworked conditions to speed the game up, and a lot more.
I'm most excited for the introduction of Sparks and Shadows, effects that illustrate check successes and failures to give players and the Judge more narrative control and variability than simple pass/fail or success/great success/crit success. It's a simple system, but elegant, and the people I've tried it with like it a lot.
In general, the game is moving away from "Old School/New School Smashed Together," and more toward a "Old School Playstyle/New School Mechanics" arrangement, dispensing with a lot of nostalgic but ultimately ineffective nods to the past (like score/modifier, for example).
This sounds incredible, I truly can't wait. You got an idea of a timeframe of when we can expect this goodness? Or is it still to far off to make such judgements?
Hi! Is the game no longer under development? It looks really awesome I'd love to see it finished, just wondering what's been happening since we haven't gotten an update in a year!
Hello! Sorry for the late reply. Yes the game is still being worked on, though I do operate on ADHD time. 😁 All the recent events tactical ttrpg world have lit a fire in me to get the next update out soon, and it will be a big one!
In the peasant generator, the lineages provide some bonuses to stats. However, in the book, I can't find these bonuses listed anywhere. Do lineages actually provide bonuses?
Hi Morgan! Thanks for asking- peasants can do both of those things! The new versions mentions maneuvers but fails to specify the opportunity attacks, so thanks for bringing that to my attention!
really love this game!! the combat and rules seem so clean, and the vibes are so great! a mix of old school gritty with new school streamlined design :D
one question - for actions with Melee/Conjury, do they require BOTH a conjury item and a melee weapon? Or just one of them? Saw a few in the Blood and Earth themes like thay.
Thanks for asking and for checking out the game! :) To use an action, you must be wielding an implement with a matching keyword. So Melee/Conjury actions could be used as either a melee action with a melee weapon, or a conjury action with a conjury weapon. To improve clarity, the language is being revised in the next version to "Melee or Conjury."
I'm really liking the rules, eager to try this with my party. One piece of feedback I'd like to give is that the font used for headers looks awesomely stylish but is also hard to read, so looking quickly for a header is not very easy.
This game looks incredible, and I can't wait to play it. The only thing I could see that might be an issue with this game in terms of how my table does things is the initiative system. I usually like games that alternate sides instead of having all units on a side go in a single phase. But that's really just a small nitpick, because I think this is a great ruleset for getting some of the OSR-inspired dungeon crawler vibe into a streamlined tactical experience.
thank you so much! maybe you can homebrew your own initiative system. it would be a little tricky, because the structure of the combat round ties into a couple other systems, like Peril, but I bet you could make it work. If you do, I'd love to see it!
← Return to TTRPG
Comments
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
I came across this game after a friend introduced me to it, and it looks really solid. As someone who tried making an RPG a while back that attempted to cover similar ground, you did a much better job handling these systems/ideas than I did. I particularly like the way that healing, endurance, rations, and travel all tie in together. I think that's a really elegant way of handling things. I also think your system for random stat generation is great, and strikes a good balance between providing random outcomes without being a slog.
I do have one point I'm not clear on though, and that's the game's general approach to combat. Trespasser seems to be taking the approach of a lot of OSR-influenced games where combat is something that should be actively avoided wherever possible, and that when a party has the choice between resolving something with or without combat they should always pick the latter (that's how I interpreted the first paragraph on pg 27, at least). It then goes on to provide a quite in-depth and tactical combat system, which I think is interesting, but it also seems at sort of at odds with that previous point. I'm not sure I understand the design intent here. Why would you spend time elaborating rules for something you want the players to not do?
My view has always been that the amount of space a game allocates to providing rules for something should correlate with how often it expects you to be doing that thing while playing. For example, consider a hypothetical game that spends 3/4 of its page count on combat and magic, and only two pages on crafting. I would interpret that to mean the game expects you to spend most of your time either in combat or working with magic, and that craft-ing is a niche activity that will come up only rarely if at all. It sounds like that may not be the model you're working under. I would be grateful for any clarifications you could provide.
This is a great point! You've arrived at the conventional wisdom that I am trying to challenge with the project. Conventional wisdom says that "combat as sport" a la 4E and "combat as war" a la OSR are fundamentally at odds, and I think you've articulated that very well.
I don't necessarily think that is the case. Even in OSR games, combat is not always avoidable. Engaging with the combat system is necessary for progression: treasure and experience are often locked behind nasty encounters, enemies will rise up to present themselves as an existential threat that will need to be dealt with, etc. So I'd say, OSR isn't telling you not to fight, it's telling you to choose your battles wisely and try to give yourself every advantage before the dice start flying.
Trespasser is trying to do the same. Even victorious battles are costly, and victory should be carefully weighed against the benefits of avoiding a fight entirely. it doesn't expect you never to fight, it expects you to have discernment about when you engage, instructing you to choose your battles carefully. It even provides a retreat mechanic to facilitate this.
I think the paragraph you reference is intended for players coming to the game from 5E or other more heroic games, where they are expected to say yes to whatever battle the DM puts in front of them and fight it to the finish. That advice to pick your fights carefully is meant to be a clue that in a player-driven game, not every battle will be meaningful or necessary, and the party will have to be judicious about when it is worth it to fight. The Judge and the game will not make that decision for them.
This is often the first thing people wonder when they look at Trespasser, so I'm glad you've given me an opportunity to talk about it a bit! I often describe the goal of combining tactical combat with OSR principles as a "peanut butter and tuna fish" sandwich. My goal is to make that sandwich delicious, as stupid an idea as it is! 😁 It's been a great design problem at the heart of this experiment that has kept me interested in it a lot longer than I thought I would be! But I think Trespasser has struck a good chord in the current edition.
And to add just a little more context, I started out making this game for my table, who always felt that OSR didn't have enough to grab on to to keep them interested. We all really like picking character options and moving miniatures around a table, but I wanted to try and prove that you could still enjoy that in the context of a player-driven, old school style game!
Thank you for giving an in-depth response. I think I better understand what you were trying to go for with the game. I look forward to trying it out when I get the chance.
"Dark fantasy D&D 4e" has me obsessed; right up my alley. I've been running 4e weekly for over a year now, and this addresses a lot of the little stumbling blocks I've experienced with it.
I love what this game is offering. I've been reading through the pdf over the last few days, and my friend and I tried it out on a whim today, which admittedly was not the best way to see the game in motion for the first time, but I definitely could see myself playing and running more of this.
One major mechanical question that came up: a character can only attempt one deed per turn, but the Wait action ends your turn and lets you take a second turn in the late phase of the combat round. Does that mean you can use a deed in the early phase, Wait, then use another deed during your secondary turn in the late phase? My instinct was that wasn't the intended interaction, but as-written that does seem like a valid strategy.
Thank you for checking out the game and for pointing this out- that definitely needs a clarification! Rules as intended, you are only meant to attempt one deed per turn; the Wait action is meant to let you put your turn 'on hold' and then finish it in the late phase, not grant you another turn- the language of that action is currently misleading! I'll try to catch it in the next update.
Makes sense! Thanks for the response!
Hello. I've been reading the book and I must honestly say it is the first OSR game I'm excited to play. Our monday gaming group may in fact play the new 2.0 edition as our next campaign in week after next. I'm hoping to play Earth Craft using Conjurer, since messing with obstacles and breaking them for a blast sounds very fun, and terrain manipulation is good control thing.
I would however like to mention that at few places the calling names are wrong. On Page 88 the table lists "magician" instead of "conjuror", and page 109 has "improve core features as a brigand" despite the calling being marauder. These are very minor things, but I figured I mention them in case such may be of help.
Hello! There is a patch coming tomorrow that will address a lot of the typos and inconsistencies, so I recommend you redownload the PDFs after that!
Thanks very much for checking it out, and I hope you and your group enjoy it!
Huge fan of the original, excited to see all the new changes!
Are the interior artists credited anywhere, or is this all just good stock art?
Aaron Lawrance is responsible for the cover art and some interior pieces (the Marauder, the knight at the start of the Callings chapter). The rest is public domain art.
Some pieces are my edits or variations on public domain pieces. AI was not used in any capacity.
I'll join the others here in celebrating 2.0, really glad to see an update - and it's huge, too!
Hey! I wanted to ask a question about the first day. When the players are controlling multiple characters, are you supposed to bring all those characters into combat when it occurs?
That seems to be the intent, just making sure I don't accidentally run a combat that's way more complex than it's supposed to be.
Hi, there are actually a couple pages about running the First Day that I forgot to put back in. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I will add them to the document in the next hotfix!
In general, if players are running multiple characters, they do bring all of them into combat and control all of them. Level ones can only make weapon attacks and take default actions, so it gives everyone a chance to practice using the fundamentals of the game before the other layers of complexity kick in.
This is the first TTRPG thing I've ever bought. I love this idea. And this line, "You don't get to choose where you came from, but you do get to choose who you become." As a person who changed their careers, from journalist/photographer to truck driver/logistics, I get this line.
Kudos to you- I've also moved between career paths before, and I've worked in logistics too! I'm glad the game spoke to you, and thank you for the post!
Just found out about this, and I'm loving it! Nice work!
I might've found a typo on page 8:
(Don't be afraid to try and 'win' at this game: after all, your character is trying to 'win' by staying alive and going after when they want.)
Thank you! There will be a small hot fix tomorrow to address the typos, so you may need to redownload your PDF :)
Drat I forgot this one XD
Congrats on 2.0!
Thank you! Long time coming, feels good to share it.
Amazing work, tundalus. Congrats for the 2.0 release.
I wrote a review of Trespasser. Played in a ~30 session campaign of it last year.
TL;DR is that it's a fun game! I recommend it if you want a tactical fantasy RPG.
Link to review:
https://boxman214.bearblog.dev/a-review-of-the-trespasser-ttrpg/
Thank you so much for your review! I really appreciate your feedback and hope you will get a chance to check out the new version, coming soon!
Also, the cage of talking firebats on a stick is amazing 🔥 sounds like a fun campaign
this looks incredible, I love the idea of a game that straddles two of my favorite (and seemingly contradictory) styles of play!
Contradictory, definitely! Two great tastes that go questionably together. It's a wacky experiment and I never expected it to find an audience, but I'm happy to learn there are others like me! New version is coming soon, keep an eye out :)
!!
Hey tundalus! I saw you mentioned an update coming a few posts back. Is there any update on that? The excitement is killing me!
Yeah actually my life situation changed big time over the summer, and I've had time to work on it steadily. Playtest Version 2.0 will be a big overhaul of core systems. It will retain use of the d20, but attributes, skills, fatigue, effort and other derived stats are all being retooled. There are full procedural rules now for governing the four timeframes of play (combat, dungeon exploration, travel/camping, and stronghold turns). The combat system has been reworked in a number of important ways, too, with a three-action system to clarify and simplify turns, a new peril system to create escalating tension in combat, reworked conditions to speed the game up, and a lot more.
I'm most excited for the introduction of Sparks and Shadows, effects that illustrate check successes and failures to give players and the Judge more narrative control and variability than simple pass/fail or success/great success/crit success. It's a simple system, but elegant, and the people I've tried it with like it a lot.
In general, the game is moving away from "Old School/New School Smashed Together," and more toward a "Old School Playstyle/New School Mechanics" arrangement, dispensing with a lot of nostalgic but ultimately ineffective nods to the past (like score/modifier, for example).
This sounds dope @tundalus! Looking forward to it.
This sounds incredible, I truly can't wait. You got an idea of a timeframe of when we can expect this goodness? Or is it still to far off to make such judgements?
By the end of the year, hopefully! So I can say merry Tres-mas in my post.
Just stumbled across this and I'm loving everything about it so far, hope to play it very soon! Would love to see a full release. c:
This was a very pleasant surprise to find, and it's gonna be our go-to for an upcoming campaign; wish you luck with that next update
Hi! Is the game no longer under development? It looks really awesome I'd love to see it finished, just wondering what's been happening since we haven't gotten an update in a year!
Seconded!
Hello! Sorry for the late reply. Yes the game is still being worked on, though I do operate on ADHD time. 😁 All the recent events tactical ttrpg world have lit a fire in me to get the next update out soon, and it will be a big one!
Looks really quite cool. Upon reading it further it would be great if there was an expansion covering solo or co-op.
Hi,
In the peasant generator, the lineages provide some bonuses to stats. However, in the book, I can't find these bonuses listed anywhere. Do lineages actually provide bonuses?
They don't, the bonuses were removed in 1.2
This looks like an awesome game. Any idea when you will have the monster entries complete, or at least the formula for creating your own monsters?
Hi! Monster creation guidelines will be added in the next update, v1.21, coming very soon! There will also be a few more monsters added
hiya! had one more question on the rules of this game:
Can peasants take opportunity attacks or use manuevers?
Hi Morgan! Thanks for asking- peasants can do both of those things! The new versions mentions maneuvers but fails to specify the opportunity attacks, so thanks for bringing that to my attention!
really love this game!! the combat and rules seem so clean, and the vibes are so great! a mix of old school gritty with new school streamlined design :D
one question - for actions with Melee/Conjury, do they require BOTH a conjury item and a melee weapon? Or just one of them? Saw a few in the Blood and Earth themes like thay.
Thanks for asking and for checking out the game! :) To use an action, you must be wielding an implement with a matching keyword. So Melee/Conjury actions could be used as either a melee action with a melee weapon, or a conjury action with a conjury weapon. To improve clarity, the language is being revised in the next version to "Melee or Conjury."
Really solid
Great!
Looking solid so far. I really like the alignment system. Don't recall seeing anything quite like it. So much more nuanced than straight good and evil
Great project!
Thank you! There's still a long way to go, but I'm getting lots of great feedback.
I'm really liking the rules, eager to try this with my party. One piece of feedback I'd like to give is that the font used for headers looks awesomely stylish but is also hard to read, so looking quickly for a header is not very easy.
i get what you mean- the PDFs are bookmarked if that helps at all!
This game looks incredible, and I can't wait to play it. The only thing I could see that might be an issue with this game in terms of how my table does things is the initiative system. I usually like games that alternate sides instead of having all units on a side go in a single phase. But that's really just a small nitpick, because I think this is a great ruleset for getting some of the OSR-inspired dungeon crawler vibe into a streamlined tactical experience.
thank you so much! maybe you can homebrew your own initiative system. it would be a little tricky, because the structure of the combat round ties into a couple other systems, like Peril, but I bet you could make it work. If you do, I'd love to see it!
This is a great looking ruleset. Layout is really clean too. Would love to see a VTT implementation down the road. Good work.
Thanks for giving it a look- yeah VTT is something I have no experience with, but I'm eager to learn, it seems like a must for a game like this!