While this is still a work-in-progress, I would like to present a variant rule for undertaking journeys.

In a nutshell, journeys are completed by tracking the daily progress of the company "D&D style". So instead of determining how many days it takes to travel X number of miles, this variant determines how many miles the company travels in X number of days.

While the end result is about the same, it allows more granularity as to what happens to the companions and where. It also changes the narrative style a bit, and makes it easier to play "in the present", without assuming that the company will reach its destination in X number of days without changing its mind about direction, purpose or "sidequests". It also frees the Loremaster from the chores of having to calculate distance, apply modifiers and figure out the number of Fatigue and Corruption tests beforehand; this can be done as the company goes along.

Any comment is welcome.

[edit] *** link broken and removed ***

Hum, the link above does not seem to work...

lets try this one: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17V3uH12...h1AEOSK7-4/edit

Too Long; Didn't Read:

1) Player heroes decide the route they intend to take, knowing that they can change or interrupt their journey at any moment.

2) Companions decide of their marching order and who's Guide, Scout, Huntsman and Look-out.

3) All companions roll Lore. Accumulate Journey dice (similar to combat advantage dice) to use on roll during the Journey.

4) Select equipment, mounts and pack animals (bit of houseruling here about Treasure and extensive traveling gear).

5) Track progress by cross-referencing region's terrain and road conditions (trackless, path, or good road). Progress is measured in hex(es) per day(s).

6) Make Fatigue test every 6 days in summer, every 3 days in spring and fall and every 2 days in winter (easier to keep common denominator to match daily progress). Failed test and eye triggers Hazard episode. Hazard Table to come...

7) Whenever a Fatigue test is made in shadow or dark lands; make a Corruption test. Also, make a corruption test when entering dark lands.

To paraphrase J. Michael Straczynski, my characters move at the speed of plot. I tend to narrate between rolls rather than individual days. Sometimes it's day by day, or even half days. Sometimes, a number of days.

Well as I said, It's all a matter of style.

Like Babylon 5, I can use Tale of the Wild and have 5 seasons of pre-written material, but I already said that these variant rules were not really meant for that type of game...

And while there's wisdom in Straczynski's famous quote, why then have any journey rules? I find that unlike B5 were characters and action gravitate around a center point, Middle Earth (especially the Wilderlands) are vast and wild enough to allow the plot to be shaped by the speed of the character, and by what happens between here, there and back again.

One of the things that attracted me in ToR was that unlike most other games, it considered Journey as main theme for the game.

Again, a matter of preference I guess...

Nicely done, Glorfindel! I may explore using this, depending on how our first Journey goes (haven't got a chance to check out the RAW yet on this).

There's a few minor typos; let me know if you would like them pointed out to fix (say, before you make a PDF).

Overall I like what you've done, and you can tell that you thought this through pretty nicely. It'll come down to Loremaster preference, I would imagine, on what type of narrative feel they're going for.

Yeah, perhaps it was a bit premature to post these rules yet. On the other hand, I wanted to ear comments before I went to far...

A closer-to-final version 2 is coming. If that one has typos,I'd be grateful if you let me know.

It's indeed all about the narrative feel. The default system works great with published (and fan-made) adventures where objectives are clear, journeys are pre-calculated and encounters are planned, but not as well in games improvised on the fly or based on very loose scripts (in my experience and opinion). For that, a progress-by-day mechanic may be a better too for a "roll as we go" type of game.

Hi Glorfindel, thanks for sharing this. It looks good and you've obviously put a lot of work into it. I'm actually interested because I'd been looking at the same kind of thing (i.e. turning the journey rules around to track progress in smaller increments), though I was trying to keep the numbers the same as the core rules.

Boiling down the journey rules as written to do this, I reckon you get the following:

So I'm interested in the thinking behind some of the changes you've made, if that's OK?

1. Under the Terrain Difficulty table on pg 32 of the Loremaster's Book it says "Travelling across a distance on a good road gives a modifier of x0.5, halving the time needed to cover the entire route, regardless of the terrain the road traverses." So I'm wondering why you've chosen to have the combination of road condition (Trackless, Well-Trodden Path and Good Road) and terrain type significant?
2. Assuming I've calculated correctly you appear to have changed the movement rates a fair bit (e.g. Hard-Trackless = 1 hex / 2 days as opposed to 1 hex / day, Severe-Trackless = 1 hex / 3 days as opposed to 2 hexes / 3 days). So why not stick with the rates as written?
3. The frequency of Fatigue tests per season in your variant is again different from the core rules. Any particular reason?

Please don't take any of this as criticism of what you've done. I'm just intrigued regarding some of the decisions you made. Thanks.

Hey no worries; I've posted this work in progress exactly for the purpose of creating discussion. You've notice that the distance covered isn't an exact translation of the distance by the book. Perhaps in a few posts you'll convince me that it was a mistake...

I decided to rebuilt the distance/day to avoid fraction like 2 hexes per 3 days or 3 hexes per 2 days, simply for greater ease of use. Instead, I made multiple "steps" of speed, and a good road allow you to progress "1 step" faster as opposed to double. Again, its a question of quick and easy reference. Since "quick and easy" was among my first motivations to change from the default journey rules, I plainly assume the distortion (well, for the moment anyways; I expect this is the element of this variant that will turn people off the most).

As for Fatigue tests, I tried a frequency "in-line" with the progression. Since 6 is dividable by 3, 2 and 1, it made sense for me to have Fatigue test at intervals that are most compatible with progression. I eliminated the "every 4 days" for the same reasons.

Good. I am pleased

I certainly wouldn't say it was a mistake, it is just a matter of preference I think. Personally I feel I'd prefer to keep the rules the same so I can use both journey perspectives interchangeably but your variant stands up well in its own right and is slightly simpler, which was your stated objective.

In this context your 'step' reasoning and avoidance of fractions make a lot of sense to me. As it's a "quick and easy" replacement for the journey rules I think I'd concur with these changes. Again it is simply a matter of preference and for my own purposes I think I'd prefer to keep the rates etc the same so it's more of an add-on to the journey rules rather than a replacement. If you get what I mean. I feel I can put up with a bit of fiddling around with fractions to maintain that, I guess.

Thanks for the response and for sharing your rules variant and thinking.

Love it! Well done on all the conversions. I especially like the differentiation between types of roads and the travelling gear. Those will definitely go in my game.

Thanks for the good ideas!

Version 2. Still a work in progress, but starting to look more like a final version. Hazard table coming soon.

Credits to Rich H for the background and borders for the document. I hope that's OK with you Rich; I'll pull it out otherwise.

https://dl-web.dropbox.com/get/Journey%20Al..._6dE1ip1Z-BnxXQ

et voila, final version.

Again, critiques and comments are always welcome

https://www.dropbox.com/s/11vib559gfs23ip/J...s%20Final.pdf?m

Glorfindel

Having followed your development of these variant rules, I have to say you've done a great job with them, Glorfindel. The final version looks awesome. Very well done indeed.

Thanks for the shout Glorfindel and of course it's okay! Really happy it was of use to someone.

Downloading this now and will have a look later. Very intriguing...