Thought-Experiment: Virtues through Valour

[DracoDruid]

Hey again everyone,

I would like you guys to help me re-think this idea of me:

Background
I am personally not a big fan of items as part of character advancement as are Rewards now.
So question that always immediatly pops up is: "What happens when it is lost or destroyed during an adventure?"
Logically, the character would have to go without one (or maybe several!) of his character advancements.
Something I think as unfair.
Besides a character advancement should be something coming from within, something that can't be taken away.
That is my POV, and the basis for this experiment.
If you disagree and think the experiment is stupid, please just keep away.
If you disagree but like to tinker with me on this, you are more than welcome.

Basic Concept
1) Instead of Valour giving Rewards, points in Valour also entitle the character to take a Virtue, just as Wisdom does.
2) Special items (either with special qualities or culture specific items) are given by the Loremaster,
either as part of a treasure or as a gift because of the character's high Standing.

Consequences
This is where you guys come into play.
Does this give the characters to many Virtues?
Do we need more Virtues?
Do we HAVE to change specific Virtues?
Can/Should we convert some Reward (-effects) into Virtues?

Thanks and happy tinkering!

EDIT:
BTW, is it "through", "by", "via", or what?!

[Halbarad]

Hey there Draco.

I will give some thought to your proposals, but I should point out that items gained as Rewards have plot immunity and should be withdrawn, lost or destroyed during play, without the player's consent. I'm certain that it mentions this somewhere in the rulebook.

[DracoDruid]

Happy to here that!

But plot immunity? I never read about that, but even if so, it's a cheesy thing.

What if the heroes get captured and stripped of their equipments?
No you guys are naked, but sure, they left your precious weapon with you...

[Rocmistro]

Such contrivances should only be a temporary thing.

I see your side of this, Draco. When I first read the game, like you, I raised an eyebrow at the "item as a permanent part of one's character sheet." After some reflection, I realized it was only my D&D paradigms that had forged that viewpoint.

Consider the strengths of such a design:
-It keeps players from constantly upgrading their gear. In LotR, almost everyone who has a weapon or armor, keeps it for the entirety of the saga. Most of the characters would rather lose a finger than their personal weapon. So the idea of quality weapons as commodities goes right out, and TOR's game design more or less reinforces this (almost too much one might say).

-The flaw, as you have already noted, is the world-reality-gymnastics one must perform in order to get said weapon or armor back to the player in the event of a scenario where it would only have made sense that such a thing was taken away. (Such as capture, imprisonment, or theft). What I would caution you to do is make such occurrences rare indeed. Gear aside, players generally don't like it when they get captured, and if it happens regularly, they just end up feeling like they are not in control of their character's own destiny.

All that being said, mechanically, your design can work, especially if you just "reskin" the mechanical benefits of qualities to, for example "talents" or "feats" or "powers" or whatever. (ie, instead of "fell" being a property attached to a specific weapon, it is now attached to the player when wielding that weapon).

You will, of course, run into issues if you start heaping those "qualities" on top of enchanted qualities (which, if I understand you correctly, would still be available and still be attached to specific weapons).

[Halbarad]

I don't know that I agree about the 'cheese' factor Drac. There can be a lot of emotional attachment, in character, to the items that are taken as rewards. That sword you carry is not just a +5 Vorpal Sword. It may have a name and a history. It may be the blade that your grandfather used to strike the head from Durlug the Vile, passed from his father to him and then through your father to you. I believe that in the prisoners example you use, that the player should be allowed to retrieve his 'reward' as he makes his escape, or that as LM, recompense to the player in the form of a replacement reward item should be made at the earliest possible opportunity. Certainly read something to that effect in the First Ed rules. I can't confirm whether it made the jump to 2nd Ed.

Anyhow, I'm not going to hijack your thread and I'm going to have a think about your proposal.

[DracoDruid]

Hello Rocmistro,

I see we have a similar background.
One of the things I HATE about DnD and the reason why pc-games like Diablo or WoW don't trigger me is that I have absolutely NO fun in item-hunting.
Personally, I can happily live without weapon lists other than a handful of generic weapons that can be "skinned" as desired by the players. (See my other thread here. It started with another concept but at my 3rd post I rethought that.)

I am not completely sure what you mean by enchanted qualities.
Is this something from one of the other sourcebooks?
I am only familiar with the (old) core books and my copies of the revised one + lake-town + rivendell is shipping across the atlantic ATM.

@ Halbarad:
I like the idea of heirloom items A LOT. But I just don't like them as part of the whole Valour/Wisdom-benefit concept.
Just role with it here, okay.

[Halbarad]

Added an edit to previous post.

[Rocmistro]

Hello Rocmistro,
...
I am not completely sure what you mean by enchanted qualities.
Is this something from one of the other sourcebooks?
I am only familiar with the (old) core books and my copies of the revised one + lake-town + rivendell is shipping across the atlantic ATM. )

Yes, the Rivendell sourcebook contains enchanted qualities, which are better than the normal qualities. They are meant to be interwoven together, but there is still a "quality" cap.

This is a perfect example of what I mean by a lack of familiarity with the system as a whole can lead to house-rules or tinkering which might "break" something.

Can I ask...be more specific about what it is you don't like about physical items as part of a character's overall progress/power?

[Glorelendil]

I am not completely sure what you mean by enchanted qualities.
Is this something from one of the other sourcebooks?
I am only familiar with the (old) core books and my copies of the revised one + lake-town + rivendell is shipping across the atlantic ATM.

Yes, it's in Rivendell. There are new rules for "finding" magical weapons and armor in treasure hordes. You can only unlock the magical qualities by spending Valour, or by donating your old weapons and armor with Rewards and Qualities to your cultural group. (I.e., putting it in the museum at Michel Delving.) If things like Keen or Fell are Virtues, presumably they would either stack with enchanted qualities such as Superior Keen or Superior Fell, which would be too powerful, or negate them, which would be unfair to the player.

[DracoDruid]

Well, then I should probably wait for my books to arrive, to get a more detailled look on Rewards.
But even if not, if a house-rule is broken, away with it.
I just link to tinker...

@ Rocmistro:
I can't really put a finger to this. I simply dislike items as a form of advancement.
Maybe it's a remnent from DnD where you HAD to have those bunch of items or be underpowered.
IDK.
A character advancement should - IMO - be some quality of the person and not his equipment.
And a character should be (almost) as capable without his stuff than with it.
It's just my personal preference.

@ all:
But as I said in the beginning, if you disagree and don't wish to tinker, just leave.
No hard feelings.