Hello all,

below you will find an extract from the upcoming Loremaster's Screen, part of a box addressing the rules for Corruption rolls due to blighted places. It came to my mind to preview this here when I read a post about expanded journey rules, where the author directly pointed to the number of Corruption rolls required to traverse any part of Mirkwood as one of the weaknesses of the journey rules as written. I hope this clarification will address most of the concerns about Corruption (the full text included in the LM Screen features also a 'quick and dirty' rule to determine whether a place is blighted or not, to be employed if the LM doesn't want to determine it, or if the adventure does not specify it).


Concerning Blighted Places - a Clarification
The rules found at page 57 of the Loremaster’s Book detail what happens when a company of adventurers enters an area qualifying as a blighted place. From the way the rules have been presented in that chapter, it seems that players are required to make Corruption tests every time they cross areas rated as Wild lands, Shadow lands and Dark lands, making for a rather unforgiving rule.

The original intent of the rule was that it is always left to the discretion of the Loremaster to determine whether a place must be considered blighted or not. The Blighted Lands table must be used when the Loremaster has decided that an area is indeed blighted, to determine the frequency of the required Corruption tests.

For example, the text for the Marsh-bell adventure applies the rule as intended, when at page 130, under the Entering Mirkwood paragraph, the bulleted text states that “The part of the Long Marshes that is inside Mirkwood qualifies as a blighted place.”

Under this interpretation, it is entirely possible for an area found within a region classified as Wild, Shadow or even Dark not to require any Corruption test to traverse. As far as the accumulation of Shadow is concerned, the various region types as classified in the Loremaster map serve as guidelines for the Loremaster to decide whether the region currently traversed by company is blighted or not, with Free lands being rarely blighted, and Dark lands being mostly so.

Hello Francesco,

That clears up quite a bit of apprehension I've had about sending my group of players anywhere near Mirkwood, as I had understood that entering any Wild, Shadow, or Dark land to require Corruption rolls. I remember reading the part about entering Blighted lands, but i took that to mean that all Wild, Shadow and Dark lands are considered to be Blighted.

This really helps.

Thanks

Thanks, Francesco!

In one of my two games, the group should have 5 forays into Shadow Lands ... in this case, the forest lake east of Rhosgobel. However, while writing up my intended adventure sessions there for them, I did NOT factor their being in a blighted place until they actually go INTO haunted ruins I am setting there ... at present rate, that should be only 2 times. I'm glad to know we're on the same page!

Thanks for this clarification! I'd assumed the entire area marked as Blighted required Corruption tests, though I'd been ignoring it while in areas of Mirkwood occupied (or heavily traveled) by the Elves and Woodmen. I figured if those guys weren't all insane then it must not be TOO bad in there. It's good to know that those rules were written with the assumption of even more leniency, though (one of my groups might be going down the Old Forest Road soon).

This really helps me as I write the Adventure phases for my campaign. I was slightly concerned about the Corruption factor in Mirkwood, but I was slightly excited about it too. Even though I hope the majority of my players keep from falling to their Shadow weaknesses, I think it would bring much entertainment around the table if at least one were to slide down the path of Misery.

I thank you as well. My experience running The Marsh-bell gave me a feel for when I can "fudge" with rules and rulings. This clarification justifies my findings. Looking forward to more great stuff from you guys.

That was actually the way I've interpreted it all along, but thank you for removing my last lingering doubts.

/wolf