forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Hi Everyone,

Please forgive me if I'm late to the party here, as I'm new to The One Ring. No doubt stuff like this has already been discussed to death and I just wasn't there for it.

So I was thinking I really like the idea of "endurance" vs. "hit points", with everything it entails - becoming weary, genuine wounds being an entirely different ball game, etc. However, it seems to me that, as the system stands, endurance points really aren't all that distinct from the old D&D hit point system - except for becoming weary.

When I think about becoming weary in combat, especially as it plays out in Tolkien's works, it isn't just getting bashed about that makes you tired; it's the full-out strain of fighting in general. In a fight, you are giving everything you have to stay alive. Just because someone didn't land a blow doesn't mean you're not shoving, swinging, blocking, etc. - doing all you can to prevent it. This also ought to wear you down over time.

My suggestion would be for everyone in a melee stance to lose one endurance point per round, until they reach their fatigue threshold. Once they are weary, I don't want them to fall unconscious if they aren't hit, but they should still slowly become weary even if they manage to parry every single blow. The same should go for the enemies. The guys in rearward stance should be able to last a good deal longer. Drawing a bow is hard work, but nothing like the grit of full-out melee combat.

To me this would make TOR's endurance more truly that, and not just hit points. It would be truer to Tolkien - where Gandalf in Moria was "already weary", though of course no orc had touched him. Perhaps this would unbalance the fine tuning of the system, but it could be offset some by having a number of endurance points given back at the end of combat.

Any thoughts?

Such a thing only makes it tougher for PCs. Enemies don't really track endurance...they're just there to die. Only PCs really care about attrition. In short, I would only use such an idea if I thought the game was just too darn easy on the players.

Because in this game, Weary is a brutal status effect.

Angelalex242 wrote:Such a thing only makes it tougher for PCs. Enemies don't really track endurance...they're just there to die. Only PCs really care about attrition. In short, I would only use such an idea if I thought the game was just too darn easy on the players.

Because in this game, Weary is a brutal status effect.

Easy or hard isn't really the point - it's feeling truer to the source material. Heck, you can give the players a few more EP, or put them up against less foes if you feel it's too hard. This has to be done anyway already, as your party may have fewer or more adventurers, and that makes a huge difference where difficulty is concerned.

Oh, but it is the point. Because a too difficult game just has players that quit, and then nobody plays. Never underestimate the power of a ragequit, or suffer the fate of an empty table you will.

This opens up the decades old "are hit points meat?" argument. I think in TOR the answer is "only partly". When you lose 5 Endurance to an orc's attack it's largely what you are describing. If that were physical damage it would be odd that you could recover some/all of it from Rally Comrade, or from resting for 30 minutes after a fight.

The point I think you are making is that even if you parry every blow, or even if you are only attacking and not having to defend, swinging a weapon in real combat is exhausting. True enough, but for me this falls on the wrong side of the "how much detailed realism do I actually need?" line. If nothing else, I don't want to have to keep track of whether or not I remembered to deduct a point each round. One of the things I love about TOR, compared to many RPGs, is the light bookkeeping.

Does your idea more accurately represent the spirit of the texts? I dunno...Bilbo fought those spiders by himself for a while without becoming exhausted, and Legolas and Gimli fought for a long time at Helm's Deep. Was there a passage you were thinking of?

Giffman, it should also be noted that effectively, what you are asking for is represented by the hero's fatigue rating (encumbrance). It's assumed that all that dodging, dipping, ducking, diving and...dodging...are in fact taxing. It's just not represented as a variable number, but rather, a static one. In TOR, that static number is your Fatigue level.

Rocmistro wrote:Giffman, it should also be noted that effectively, what you are asking for is represented by the hero's fatigue rating (encumbrance). It's assumed that all that dodging, dipping, ducking, diving and...dodging...are in fact taxing. It's just not represented as a variable number, but rather, a static one. In TOR, that static number is your Fatigue level.

Yeah, this is an excellent point.

Meh, Fatigue. Otherwise known as 'why heavy armor is a terrible idea in LOTR, except maybe for dwarves.'

Angelalex242 wrote:Meh, Fatigue. Otherwise known as 'why heavy armor is a terrible idea in LOTR, except maybe for dwarves.'

Otherwise known as, let's make it slightly suboptimal so heroes look more like the fellowship, and less like the Knights Templar.

Slightly? Have you ran the numbers of Elfcrusher's combat simulator lately? Heavy Armor will KILL you.

In fact, it kills you faster then running around naked.