Advancing Fellowship Focus rules

[Falenthal]

I like your idea, poosticks7. I had been thinking about Ecorce's method of limiting the number of points by success, but didn't find a good option.

Let's see, here are some follow-up ideas, based on Ecorce's and poosticks7's:

*To adapt the number of FP to the size of the group, maybe we could say that every character has as many Fellowship tick boxes as the number of companions.
But, to be nearer to the RAW's ratio of recovery (although a bit under it, i think, which is positive for me), I'd allow 1 point recovered for each box ticked; that is, as every interaction between two characters means that each one will tick one box, that's 2 Fellowship points per interaction.
The group of 3 will be able to recover in the whole Adventure phase between 6 and 8 FP. I find it very interesting that, if only two of the characters do interactions between them, the total number of FP recovered is lower than if the interactions are spread among the whole group. Very thematic.

*Hobbits and Honey-cakes: Each Virtue/Blessing/Reward that would usually add 1 point to the Fellwship pool, now allows the character who has it to add one extra tick box to his character only. This allows for one more interaction in the group and, therefore, for 2 more points recovered.

*Rangers: Different options could be shuffled (for example, that they don't count as a companions when calculating the number of tick boxes), but I like this one at first sight: they count as a companion when calculating the number of tick boxes, and they themselves have tick boxes as everyone else, but their tick boxes don't add points to the Fellowship when filled. Each interaction with a Ranger only adds 1 point to the Fellowship pool, instead of the usual 2. Others may find confort and security, even esteem, on a Ranger. But they themselves know that they have a duty that's greater than their personal relationships.
On top of that, Rangers still can't take points from the Fellowship pool to recover their own Hope.

*And last, about the skill checks. I'm tending towards the idea that no roll is needed, just the roleplay. The tick boxes already offer a limitation, so that I don't feel another one is needed. And it would widen the possibilities of the scenes, allowing to not always rely on the same skills where the characters have good ratings. Maybe I'd say that an interaction scene can only be roleplayed after any common skill roll (even if it's a failure), so as to remark that something was at stake there. The scene has of course to be related to the outcome of the roll and the intent of the skill check. It might be very interesting to hear how the players come up with a good story about how their bonds tightened when one of them failed an Athletics test with an Eye while trying to hold the other one from falling off a cliff...

Let's see what you think.

[Ecorce]

Hey Falenthal,

If the houserules need limitations (I'm not convinced right now, but still listen to everyone's opinion, I can be wrong), then I think your proposal is interesting. Limitating the number of FP recovered per character, and the number of scenes per character too (to allow everyone to play its own scene).

Maybe one disadvantage is that it would need a place on the character sheet, and there's not much place anymore. However it would be better than counting with tokens, because players would need to remember how many times they played a scene. Checking a box is still a simple and efficient way to report it, session after session, then remove the checks at the end of the Adventure Phase.

Your rule is simple. But needs an extra sheet for each player, or an alternate character sheet?

I'm thinking of another case the RAW and my houserules don't cover... group scenes. I mean, playing a Fellowship Focus between more than 2 characters. I wonder if FF should cover that idea or not. I'll have a think about it and I'll tell you.

Using your proposal, and stating we have 3 characters playing the scene, it could mean that the 3 players check one tick box, rewarding 3 FP. Great!

I have to think about it without your proposal though.

[Rich H]

I'd personally go with something a little simpler to the proposals that have been made so far and that just addresses refreshing the FP rather then personal Hope pools:

Get rid of the FP refreshing at the end of each session and instead go with allowing the player interactions with their FF to refresh the FP to its maximum amount. Set the number of times this can be done based on the length (or difficulty) of the adventure: short/easy adventures can refresh it one time, medium adventures two times and long/hard adventures three times. A different FF relationship can be used for each refresh or one can be used all the time - doesn't matter as long as the players are okay with that and the interaction/narrative adds value and is interesting. So, naturally, repeated narrative aren't interesting so naturally the players will vary and move between FF relationships themselves.

Each LM can then tweak what they view as S/M/L (or E/M/H) adventures therefore giving them the flexibility they may require but still placing a natural limit limit to the amount of times and putting the control as to the narrative of such refreshes with the players and what they come up with RPing such interactions.

If the interaction is cool and adds to the shared narrative then it refreshes the FP. Simple.

No need to mess around with any rolls, limit the times each FF can be used in the narrative, or alter Virtues etc and the LM can keep a small tally (1, 2, or 3) of the amount of times this can be used.

I've been using something similar to this in my game (just called it sources of inspiration rather than binding it to the FF) and its worked great.

[Falenthal]

While this seems cool to me, I think the main goal of Ecorce was to augment the roleplay of the characters as a group aside from that of the Fellowship Focus. The FF mechanic already has its own incentive to be roleplayed (recovering Hope points spent helping your focus).

But the Fellowship pool is, in the RAW, a resource that is thematically based in the relationship of the group, but mechanically has nothing to do with it: by the RAW, a group that is always fighting and discussing between themselves would still have a FP that would refresh every session.

So, I'd keep the FF mechanic as is, and only add some roleplaying requisite to how the FP is replenished.
I wouldn't base this replenishment on rolls (at least, not necessarily succesful rolls), but on roleplaying. The same as when autosucceeding when invoking a Trait.
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".

[Ecorce]

Thanks Rich, it was interesting.

Reading your proposal, I wonder...
Not refreshing the FP at the beginning of each session is part of those houserules. I applied this rule with my players and it seems now they care about using the FP or not. They prefer now to use their own points before picking in the FP. They make sure some FP remain for the next sessions, and currently at the end of the Adventure Phase, the FP is never empty. I'm ok with that because using a HP become something risky, and the players' dilemma creates tension for their characters.

If I understand what you mean, they would be able to refresh the whole FP by just invoking one FF?
It would be too much for me, the way we play.

However, I think this can be a good solution if your players face regularly hard situations, making them empty their HP or FP quickly. Then, refreshing the whole FP acts as a breathing for the players and their characters. Depends on the way you play and the number of sessions needed to end an Adventure Phase? It's simpler than our solutions, but too powerful to me. I want them to fill Hope is something that has to be cherished and kept alive. If they can refresh the FP that way, they won't need to use their own points, don't you think?

I'm not convinced by limitations, either by making it too easy.

[Ecorce]

While this seems cool to me, I think the main goal of Ecorce was to augment the roleplay of the characters as a group aside from that of the Fellowship Focus. The FF mechanic already has its own incentive to be roleplayed (recovering Hope points spent helping your focus).

...and indeed, I want them to play more "common" scenes (to complete my previous post).

But the Fellowship pool is, in the RAW, a resource that is thematically based in the relationship of the group, but mechanically has nothing to do with it: by the RAW, a group that is always fighting and discussing between themselves would still have a FP that would refresh every session.

So, I'd keep the FF mechanic as is, and only add some roleplaying requisite to how the FP is replenished.
I wouldn't base this replenishment on rolls (at least, not necessarily succesful rolls), but on roleplaying. The same as when autosucceeding when invoking a Trait.
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".

Maybe we don't need rolls. I'm ok with that, it could cause frustration whereas the houserules are supposed to invite players to interact more. They won't do it if they are punished by the dices.

I'm thinking about using a cards deck. Players invoking their FF pick some cards and have to use them during the scene. A way to inspire them and vary each scene. Maybe too restrictive? I think players should feel free to interact the way they want, but it could be an optional rule to help if players don't know what to tell.

If mandatory, it could be a way to replace the rolls: you just have to imagine a scene with the picked cards.

I'm not sure Hobbits' Tale would be the good choice, but that's the kind of product I think would be interesting (cards presenting places, objects, characters, events...).

[Rich H]

While this seems cool to me, I think the main goal of Ecorce was to augment the roleplay of the characters as a group aside from that of the Fellowship Focus. The FF mechanic already has its own incentive to be roleplayed (recovering Hope points spent helping your focus).

That's true but that's just mechanical, there really isn't any RPing needed to get the Hope point back that you used to invoke your attribute bonus when helping your FF, it just happens as it's a part of the game mechanics. I therefore don't think they are the same things.

But the Fellowship pool is, in the RAW, a resource that is thematically based in the relationship of the group, but mechanically has nothing to do with it: by the RAW, a group that is always fighting and discussing between themselves would still have a FP that would refresh every session.

I've always had a problem with the FP always replenishing at the end of a game sessions because its non-sensical and actually unbalancing. Therefore by removing that (which I think Ecorce is proposing albeit you aren't) you need to replace it with another way of refreshing it, particularly for longer adventures - unless you really want Hope to be a dwindling (and lost) resource. For me the obvious option is to tie it into the Fellowship and I think each focus would allow players to think of narratives for a vignette scene in order to replenish the FP.

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?

I wouldn't base this replenishment on rolls (at least, not necessarily succesful rolls), but on roleplaying. The same as when autosucceeding when invoking a Trait.

Yeah, I don't think you need rolls either.

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.

[Rich H]

Not refreshing the FP at the beginning of each session is part of those houserules. I applied this rule with my players and it seems now they care about using the FP or not. They prefer now to use their own points before picking in the FP. They make sure some FP remain for the next sessions, and currently at the end of the Adventure Phase, the FP is never empty. I'm ok with that because using a HP become something risky, and the players' dilemma creates tension for their characters.

Yeah, I can see that. It really should be something that can be tweaked for each LM and group.

If I understand what you mean, they would be able to refresh the whole FP by just invoking one FF?
It would be too much for me, the way we play.

Not exactly, the FF can be used as a hook into a narrated scene (like Poosticks described) that allows the FP to refresh. It isn't (merely) invoking someone's FF that does this but is a way of getting the players to think about their relationships with each of their FF's so that they can play out such scenes. So, each FF can be used a little bit like a trait but is just used to feed into a vignette scene that demonstrates (through, perhaps, one or more of the chosen FFs) the togetherness/spirit/whatever of the companions. So, yeah, easy to say it can be done for all the characters in the group and not just your FF.

The refreshes are limited based on the size of the adventure but would roughly equate to session refreshes in the RAW, so no real difference based upon the points that can be available throughout an adventure, however you're putting the control of those refreshes in the players' hands and also tying those refreshes to something that happens within the game and not some arbitrary point like the end of a game session.

I offered it as an option as I think the discussion around tick boxes for each character on the amount of times they can do such a thing is an over complication in a game system that already has a lot of moving parts for the players to juggle. I also think the proposals being discussed here aren't all addressing the same thing so it is confusing - ie, some proposals are about replenishing personal Hope, others about the FP, and yet others appear to be even more egregious changes from the RAW (eg, removing personal Hope altogether and having just one shared pool).

Like I say, I've used something similar in my game (ie, Sources of Inspiration) for a long time now and it's worked really well. If it helps (ie, provide further ideas) then refer to pages 10/11 of the following: https://www.dropbox.com/s/n6doog3n4q4ko ... s.pdf?dl=0

I do really like a lot of the ideas in the thread though, I think a simple solution would be nice to implement!

[Falenthal]

--OFF-TOPIC--

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n6doog3n4q4ko ... s.pdf?dl=0

The rules for Courtship do ring a bell!

[Ecorce]

OMV! (Oh My Valar)

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