Advancing Fellowship Focus rules

[Falenthal]

So, I'd keep the FF mechanic as is, and only add some roleplaying requisite to how the FP is replenished.

So you'd still refresh at the end of the session but have the players narrate a scene?

No, I also erased the "refresh at the end of the session" rule from the beginning, substituting it for something like "refresh when the fellowship has a chance during the adventure to rest and enjoy some time together or similar".

So the FP will only replenish by way of whatever mechanic we come up with here.

Also, I would set some limit to how many times this can be done to avoid abuse: it's the same spirit as with the three checkboxes per common skill category. It encourages the use of skills and traits, but also limits the "fever to roll for everything, everytime".

Which is like my suggestion above of allowing a refresh a number of times based on the scope of the adventure at hand.
[/quote]

Yeah, the idea is the same.
Some will like more to base it on the adventure (the more dangerous the task at hand is, the tighter the group gets), others on the group itself (based on the number of companions). I wouldn't mind saying: this is medium adventure, you have 2 chances to replenish the FP.

Probably the main difference between your rule and what I'm trying to go to is that, to make it blunt, your rule will allow as an average 2 such roleplaying scenes for the whole adventure (and the FP will replenish to full), while my idea is that those scenes should be more frequent, by only recovering a limited amount of points per scene played.

Other than that, I think the spirit and a big part of the ideas are in the same page.

[Falenthal]

OMV! (Oh My Valar)

I didn't see poosticks7's last post on previous page. I thought it was Fal's ideas.

The idea about tick boxes to establish a limit, depending on the number of companions, and not rolling at all, both come from poosticks7.

[Ecorce]

Probably the main difference between your rule and what I'm trying to go to is that, to make it blunt, your rule will allow as an average 2 such roleplaying scenes for the whole adventure (and the FP will replenish to full), while my idea is that those scenes should be more frequent, by only recovering a limited amount of points per scene played.

Other than that, I think the spirit and a big part of the ideas are in the same page.

There is place enough in these houserules to offer several settings, according to the LM's wishes about his way of play TOR.

My impression:
One simpler, or for players that disagree playing to much scenes (Rich's version).
One heavier, or for players enjoying little scenes of relationship (poosticks7 & Falenthal's version).

They don't contradict the bases of the houserules.

I keep on thinking about it.

[Rich H]

The rules for Courtship do ring a bell!

If I was a bird then a magpie would I be!

No, I also erased the "refresh at the end of the session" rule from the beginning, substituting it for something like "refresh when the fellowship has a chance during the adventure to rest and enjoy some time together or similar".

So the FP will only replenish by way of whatever mechanic we come up with here.

Great, didn't realise that, missed it.

Yeah, the idea is the same. Probably the main difference between your rule and what I'm trying to go to is that, to make it blunt, your rule will allow as an average 2 such roleplaying scenes for the whole adventure (and the FP will replenish to full), while my idea is that those scenes should be more frequent, by only recovering a limited amount of points per scene played.

That's a fair point and, perhaps with the right group that doesn't abuse it, there really is no need to place artificial limits on the amount of times these vignette scenes may be used.

Other than that, I think the spirit and a big part of the ideas are in the same page.

Yeah, agreed.

[Ecorce]

That's a fair point and, perhaps with the right group that doesn't abuse it, there really is no need to place artificial limits on the amount of times these vignette scenes may be used.

Agreed. That's my point on view, but I just had one group experience.
Limitations could be given as options, in the houserules.

[Falenthal]

@Rich: Do your group start every Adventure phase with full FP, or with as many points as they finished the last Adventure? I guess the former, but just to be sure.

I'm inclined to use your guideline of "# chances to recover depending on the lenght/difficulty of the adventure".

[Rich H]

@Rich: Do your group start every Adventure phase with full FP, or with as many points as they finished the last Adventure? I guess the former, but just to be sure.

Yep, the former.

My refreshes are actually as follows:

0 for a short adventure (eg, Marsh Bell)
1 for a medium (eg, Kinstrife and Dark Tidings)
2 for a long (eg, To Journey's End and the Eagles' Eyrie)

I said something different above and I've not updated the pdf. Mind you, the numbers can really be tweaked by LMs depending on play style.

[Ecorce]

I need to clarify you proposal Rich, I'm not sure to realize the way it should go...

• Players define a Relational Trait for each Fellowship Focus (my proposal)

• During a narrative scene in Adventure's Phase, players can activate their relational Trait to refill the Fellowship Pool (your proposal)

• This can be done x times (where x is defined by LM according to the Adventure)

This means the mechanics are invoked during a "free" narrative scene (I mean, a scene that has nothing to do with FF, at the beginning).

Whereas my version consists in invoking the mechanics to create a narrative scene.

Correct?

[Rich H]

Hi Ecorce,

I'd not read the posts and described things correctly - the curses of trying to use a mobile device rather than a PC!

I didn't realise/read correctly that you were proposing a relational trait for each Fellowship member but still maintaining a Fellowship Focus. I think we should steer clear of calling all of the relationships Fellowship Focus and leave that for the one (favoured) member, that way the reference to FF in the reast of the RAW can still be used (ie, regaining Hope used when invoking Attribute Bonuses if directly aiding the FF, etc). Perhaps just call the others Fellowship Relationships.

So, now that I get that then, yes, anyone could narrate a scene using their Fellowship Relationships and anyone could contribute to it using the basis of that relationship as the narrative. This can be done x times (where x is defined by LM according to the Adventure), like you say. However, I'd only use that limitation if the FP got fully refreshed. If we went with each Vignette scene just refreshing one point of the FP then I would remove that limit.

I do think the FP should refresh fully during any Fellowship Phase, that's just my own personal taste but it feels right to me that it replenishes when the PCs are spending time away from adventuring, often together, and in a safe place.

Are there any differences to narrating these scenes with your Fellowship Focus rather than other Fellowship Relationships?

[Ecorce]

Hi Ecorce,

I'd not read the posts and described things correctly - the curses of trying to use a mobile device rather than a PC!

No problem!

Are there any differences to narrating these scenes with your Fellowship Focus rather than other Fellowship Relationships?

By the way, my aim was to redefine Fellowship Focuses and clear all the RAW for that specific rule.
No more points at the end of the session if the fellow is alive, not wounded, not miserable, etc. I don't think it was a bad idea, but I didn't want to multiply ways to recover Hope using FF, and choosed to replace it by another unique way: interacting during the adventure and contributing to the fellowship's story and characters' relations. Hope points would be like a reward.

That's what I disliked in the RAW. This is just a kind of option, players don't really need to take a FF (apart from Rangers, 'cause they can't use the FP). The other thing is that players are rewarded only if their partner is in good health (mental & physical). That's a good point, but I felt it missed something to be really appealing.

I would prefer worry about someone with whom I have bonded (reality like).
I think that link need roleplay. Maybe some players don't need rules to do it naturally, but I feel many need rules to know where to focus attention. And my aim is to focus on the relation itself, more than just the partner's health.

(don't know if I'm clear, sorry if not)