I ran T&T for, I think, the whole of 1987 when I was aged 12 and 13. I bought the Corgi paperback rulebook because I wanted to play Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, but that game was too expensive for me. My DM toolkit during 1987 was the Corgi T&T rulebook, the AD&D DMG (which I had got for Christmas 1986) and the Chaosium edition of the Midkemia Press Cities book (which I must have got from Games Workshop). My DMing style was 100% improvisational, using the random tables in the DMG and the Cities book, and my own imagination which was fed by gamebooks (Fighting Fantasy, Lone Wolf and Grailquest), and the few fantasy novels I'd read (mainly children's books - my favourite was The Neverending Story).
The version of the T&T rules I played (5th Edition) seems very different from the version you played. Your version seems a lot more complicated. I don't think T&T is a good set of rules - but 5th Edition probably is a good set of rules for a freewheeling improvisational game.
My main memories of the T&T rules are:
* The many, many weapons, with descriptions
* The short but inspirational advice on creating monsters, dungeons and worlds
* The fact that the game didn't include any monster descriptions or stats, and the Monster Rating system
* The spells, and using CON as spell points
* XP for saving throws (including failed saving throws), and XP for reaching a new level of the dungeon
* The "doubles roll again" rule (in 5th Edition it's doubles, not triples, and it only apples to combat, saving throws, and I think treasure rolls?
As an alternative for running an "unserious" fantasy game, people might like to check out the B/X house rules in Black Pudding 'zine #4. They have a sort of T&T vibe about them.
Thanks for this wonderful post! Like Akiyama, I ran T&T in the (early) 1980s when I was in junior high. We loved it, for all of those gonzo reasons, and because we didn't have a baseline for what was normal anyway, and because we were kids. I played many of the similarly weird T&T solo adventures, especially the glorious City of Terrors, and then used them as adventures for my campaign (2 players, my brother and a friend). I was marinating in Moorcock's Eternal Champion cycle paperbacks, and that was probably the biggest influence, along with Zork, all entirely in keeping with the T&T spirit.
At that age, we didn't really notice the game mechanics being out of whack. 73 STR? Cool! Your handling of combat and disregard of most "fixes" since the early editions seems exactly right. What hits me now after reading your post is how evocative for me then was that single monster stat. "Barbarian Robot MR 40." Say no more! I don't remember what we did about the massive numbers of dice, it probably was part of the charm as well.
One small correction: Danforth. She is my third favorite old school fantasy rpg artist, after Trampier and Blanche. That summoning illustration!
Before the wave of Gen X nostalgia passes, if you can get a hold of Jeffrey Dillow's late-70s/early 80s adventure supplements to his High Fantasy system, they are interesting reads: Adventures in High Fantasy and Goldchester. I wish I still owned my copies, they're very hard to find. The system itself is here: https://archive.org/details/high-fantasy-1978
The system is more of historical interest as an early D&D-but-not-D&D attempt. 4 character classes: Warrior, Wizard, Beast Master, Alchemist. Damage taken in combat reduces your attack and defense in the next round. But the adventure scenarios were really notable, with some wonderful magical items.
A great read, I enjoyed this post probably too much. When I have run T&T, like Rifts, I limited what the players can play to a spot within reason. This is my fun too, not another source for a headache. Mausritter rancid? I run it at a local library and there are no problems. I run Black Pudding in my Roleplaying Study classes, and it is a fun alternative to T&T. I would suggest the Black Pudding Playbook and the Two collections to get it all.
Many years ago I got really into TNT (nobody besides me calls it that but I tried to make it a thing) and ran a campaign of it and posted a bunch of stuff for it on my blog. I agree that there's a lot of jank but it's endearing, and while the dice pools can get cumbersome, I actually really enjoy the core idea of the combat mechanics.
This post collects my house rules and various types and subtypes I created for the game such as Mystic, Huntsman, and War Dogs. I made a handful of other TNT-related posts after that but this collects the majority of them:
Thirded - curious about your player's mausritter critique - I've never played, I'm entirely finding praise for it online, but I've always been dubious because of its Into the Odd origins.
I ran T&T for, I think, the whole of 1987 when I was aged 12 and 13. I bought the Corgi paperback rulebook because I wanted to play Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, but that game was too expensive for me. My DM toolkit during 1987 was the Corgi T&T rulebook, the AD&D DMG (which I had got for Christmas 1986) and the Chaosium edition of the Midkemia Press Cities book (which I must have got from Games Workshop). My DMing style was 100% improvisational, using the random tables in the DMG and the Cities book, and my own imagination which was fed by gamebooks (Fighting Fantasy, Lone Wolf and Grailquest), and the few fantasy novels I'd read (mainly children's books - my favourite was The Neverending Story).
The version of the T&T rules I played (5th Edition) seems very different from the version you played. Your version seems a lot more complicated. I don't think T&T is a good set of rules - but 5th Edition probably is a good set of rules for a freewheeling improvisational game.
My main memories of the T&T rules are:
* The many, many weapons, with descriptions
* The short but inspirational advice on creating monsters, dungeons and worlds
* The fact that the game didn't include any monster descriptions or stats, and the Monster Rating system
* The spells, and using CON as spell points
* XP for saving throws (including failed saving throws), and XP for reaching a new level of the dungeon
* The "doubles roll again" rule (in 5th Edition it's doubles, not triples, and it only apples to combat, saving throws, and I think treasure rolls?
As an alternative for running an "unserious" fantasy game, people might like to check out the B/X house rules in Black Pudding 'zine #4. They have a sort of T&T vibe about them.
What was the name of that sword that was like a cricket bat lined with shark teeth?
Thanks for this wonderful post! Like Akiyama, I ran T&T in the (early) 1980s when I was in junior high. We loved it, for all of those gonzo reasons, and because we didn't have a baseline for what was normal anyway, and because we were kids. I played many of the similarly weird T&T solo adventures, especially the glorious City of Terrors, and then used them as adventures for my campaign (2 players, my brother and a friend). I was marinating in Moorcock's Eternal Champion cycle paperbacks, and that was probably the biggest influence, along with Zork, all entirely in keeping with the T&T spirit.
At that age, we didn't really notice the game mechanics being out of whack. 73 STR? Cool! Your handling of combat and disregard of most "fixes" since the early editions seems exactly right. What hits me now after reading your post is how evocative for me then was that single monster stat. "Barbarian Robot MR 40." Say no more! I don't remember what we did about the massive numbers of dice, it probably was part of the charm as well.
One small correction: Danforth. She is my third favorite old school fantasy rpg artist, after Trampier and Blanche. That summoning illustration!
Again, thanks.
Before the wave of Gen X nostalgia passes, if you can get a hold of Jeffrey Dillow's late-70s/early 80s adventure supplements to his High Fantasy system, they are interesting reads: Adventures in High Fantasy and Goldchester. I wish I still owned my copies, they're very hard to find. The system itself is here: https://archive.org/details/high-fantasy-1978
The system is more of historical interest as an early D&D-but-not-D&D attempt. 4 character classes: Warrior, Wizard, Beast Master, Alchemist. Damage taken in combat reduces your attack and defense in the next round. But the adventure scenarios were really notable, with some wonderful magical items.
A great read, I enjoyed this post probably too much. When I have run T&T, like Rifts, I limited what the players can play to a spot within reason. This is my fun too, not another source for a headache. Mausritter rancid? I run it at a local library and there are no problems. I run Black Pudding in my Roleplaying Study classes, and it is a fun alternative to T&T. I would suggest the Black Pudding Playbook and the Two collections to get it all.
Edit: post, not pot, I'm more of a shroomer.
Many years ago I got really into TNT (nobody besides me calls it that but I tried to make it a thing) and ran a campaign of it and posted a bunch of stuff for it on my blog. I agree that there's a lot of jank but it's endearing, and while the dice pools can get cumbersome, I actually really enjoy the core idea of the combat mechanics.
This post collects my house rules and various types and subtypes I created for the game such as Mystic, Huntsman, and War Dogs. I made a handful of other TNT-related posts after that but this collects the majority of them:
https://weirdwonderfulworlds.blogspot.com/2019/11/more-tnt-character-subtypes.html
Yes seconded feed me this intergenerational mid v late OSR beef
Thirded - curious about your player's mausritter critique - I've never played, I'm entirely finding praise for it online, but I've always been dubious because of its Into the Odd origins.
Fourthed. Rancid is such a particular description that I suspect i know why they don't like it but I still want to know.