The Riddle of Steel: why not using all dices to attack ?

[BlacKnight]

There was a ruling somewhere (I do not remember the exact location, but will try to find it for you), that if the difference between rolls is 1 or 2, the attack still manages to hit.

On the other hand, if you fight carefully (i.e. try to save your skin) and defensively, it's not uncommon for both to receive few smaller wounds before someone strikes true... and then, if you fail to get medical attention...

If you wished to actually model reality a bit more closely, you could also define which wounds are internal and require surgery (or lead to death) and which can be simply closed with enough bandages and skill in First Aid.

Meaning: if you get a stab wound in your belly, the First Aid skill may only halve the bleeding, not completely close it, as opposed to a deep cut on arm.

That's good advice. Puncture wounds were way harder to treat than cuts, given that they reched deep in the body.
If you can't completely close a wound you can end up winning the fight and then dying during the night for an hemorrhage.

You must let me know how it works for you. And I would suggest you first try the ruleset as it is, maybe for a one-shot. When I first wanted to play RoS, my group said "Why don't we stick to DnD and Shadowrun?"... well, we quickly generated few characters and I sent them to an abandoned house in the middle of winter storm (lockdown, so that I don't have to think of additional stuff), which served as hideout to few bandits... who were actually returning next day. And had numbers advantage.

They managed to put the puzzle pieces together, so when the bandits came, PCs were prepared and crushed them. And then ate horsemeat porridge. Do not ask.

Thinking about this, I wonder how good fights against nameless bandits are. For a training fight it should be ok, but considering the whole "choose your fight" mentality and the importance of spiritual attributes... well, it would be pretty lame to die against a mook.
So, should the master tone down on the opponents, offering wide chance to the PC to avoid useless fights? Or not?

Passion: Love. Hatred. Loyalty. Friendship. Your bond to a person. Or group (e.g. hatred for slavers).
Oath: A promise you have to fulfill.
Conscience: Morals and ethics. Choosing the right over the easy.
Drive: A goal. A cause. Something you wish to achieve.
Faith: Faith.

Destiny is a separate beast. That's the "end state".

The difference is, that by Passion you bind yourself to the world, while Drive states what you - the player - wish to achieve for the character. I think there were some minor differences between their uses (e.g. you use Passion when defending those you love/fighting those you hate while you use Conscience when you are doing the right thing as opposed the easy thing), but otherwise you are correct - Drive as such is mostly "character/player goal", which may be almost anything.

So if my character is motivated by revenge and wants to kill a certain person/group... is that a passion? Or an oath? Or a drive?
Ok, I get that it could be all of these, but then why make the distinction?

White die.
You have initiative.
First round, first exchange. Your CP refreshes.
(normally you would have to check for wounds, fatigue, etc., but I assume we are both fresh and ready)
Please, state your maneuver & allocate CP.

Question: do you wish for me to do a complete breakdown of combat in spoilers? With your opponents' stats & etc.? Or do you wish to have the "blind" experience of actual fight?

I will go for a "blind fight". Let's see things from the PC point of view.

Oscar swings his swords towards the captain's blade: it's a Beat with 7 dices, +2 for aggressive stance, +4 for his drive, for a total of 13 if I'm not mistaken.