forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Wbweather wrote:

Glorelendil wrote: The problem with merely adjusting the gap is that you get a trade-off between having gaps too large at low "levels" (that is, Revelation Episodes never occur) or the gap going to zero too easily (which is where we are now.) This is especially true when the mechanics are all based on linear functions, which they currently are.

This is true, but to me it makes sense that a small group would attract much less attention than a sizable group. The fellowship of 9 had several "Revelation" episodes. Broken up in groups of 2 and 3, they didn't see nearly as much of an issue.

I'm all in favor of scaling risk with Fellowship Size (which, as Rich points out, happens passively regardless), but that's only one of the variables that scales linearly. Even eliminating culture as a variable completely wouldn't fix the current problem/trade-off: you would still have either too few Revelation Episodes at low levels, or base Eye Awareness being above Hunt Threshold at higher levels.

I've got some math visualizations in mind to illustrate the problem; if I get a chance I'll put some graphs together.

Wbweather wrote:

Glorelendil wrote: The problem with merely adjusting the gap is that you get a trade-off between having gaps too large at low "levels" (that is, Revelation Episodes never occur) or the gap going to zero too easily (which is where we are now.) This is especially true when the mechanics are all based on linear functions, which they currently are.

This is true, but to me it makes sense that a small group would attract much less attention than a sizable group. The fellowship of 9 had several "Revelation" episodes. Broken up in groups of 2 and 3, they didn't see nearly as much of an issue.

Your assumption.

We are discussing about TOR rules, not the books nor the vision of Tolkien.

And this is an optionnal rule. If you feel uneasy with it, then just ignore it.

Terisonen wrote:And this is an optionnal rule. If you feel uneasy with it, then just ignore it.

That's not really adding to the discussion; the whole point of the house rules section is to, well, discuss and create house rules - whether those be completely new ones or modifications of existing rules. Also, it's a wickedly cool idea/mechanic so to simply ignore would be an incredible waste.

Wbweather wrote:This is true, but to me it makes sense that a small group would attract much less attention than a sizable group. The fellowship of 9 had several "Revelation" episodes. Broken up in groups of 2 and 3, they didn't see nearly as much of an issue.

That's also what the RAW tries to do as well; all things being equal apart from the number of PCs in a group, the larger group will start out with a higher Eye Awareness and so be closer to the threshold amount and therefore be nearer to a Revelation episode. This though happens quicker than it perhaps should as with more PCs, more EYEs are rolled, and therefore the gap between Eye Awareness and Threshold is reduced far quicker.

I still think an idea would be to:

1) Start Eye Awareness (EA) at zero

2) When an EYE is rolled in-game by a PC then EA increases by a fixed number; 0 for hobbits, 1 for everyone else but High Elves and Rangers, and 2 for those cultures

3) Other events like use of magic also add to EA

This doesn't factor in high Valour/Wisdom and items of renown though which if we want to match up with the requirements of the RAW are needed - perhaps these add 1 point each to EA whenever an EYE is rolled so those cultural numbers above are base values.

Likely would also need to tweak the starting Threshold scores.

Removing enchanted weapons/armour and high Wisdom/Valour as factors certainly alleviates (but doesn't eliminate) the threshold problem, but it's kind of a shame (imo) to do so.

I'm honestly starting to think that the solution is just to come up with new rules describing what happens when your starting Eye Awareness is already above the threshold.

Glorelendil wrote:Removing enchanted weapons/armour and high Wisdom/Valour as factors certainly alleviates (but doesn't eliminate) the threshold problem, but it's kind of a shame (imo) to do so.

It's why I suggested that they add to the base culture value - you may have missed that bit. But those would be added with each EYE roll which is far more common than the RAW so would have to be accounted for.

Glorelendil wrote:I'm honestly starting to think that the solution is just to come up with new rules describing what happens when your starting Eye Awareness is already above the threshold.

I think there's also an issue as to how quickly a company gets to the threshold as well.

May be Wisdom more than 4 should not be counted as a +1 for the starting value. So:

To find the starting Eye Awareness of the company,
add up the individual scores of all companions in the
group, then add 1 for each hero with a score of
Valour at 4 or more.

Wisdom learn you to have a low profile...

How about...
Start at 0
Revelation at 6
If you roll an Eye and any of your success dice are 1 or 2, increase Eye Awareness by 1
If you're a Noldor or Ranger, it's 1-3
If you're a Hobbit, it's 1

As you increase in level (and have higher skills) it becomes more likely that you increase Eye Awareness
If you have any enchanted arms/armours, add +1 to your range

One thing I like about this is that it's less likely to trigger on your worst skills, so you actually have a relative incentive to use them.

Still a little concerned about having to eyeball those extra dice but it is certainly going in the right direction and it'd be easy to add an Eye Awareness entry on the character sheet near to the Shadow score.

What about high Valour and Wisdom? Are you leaving those out?

Is 6 about the right number? Any reasoning as to why you've picked it?