forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Ooh ooh ooh....

Each player's threshold is the higher (lower?) of their Wisdom and Valour.
+2 for Noldor, +1 for Ranger, -1 for Hobbit.
+1 for each enchanted arms/armour.

There, that incorporates all of the variables in RAW.

Yeah, I don't know if 6 is the right number, but I like the idea of a fixed (low) number because each stage could be named and described, sort of like the 4 degrees of shadow madness.

Glorelendil wrote:Ooh ooh ooh....

Each player's threshold is the higher (lower?) of their Wisdom and Valour.
+2 for Noldor, +1 for Ranger, -1 for Hobbit.
+1 for each enchanted arms/armour.

There, that incorporates all of the variables in RAW.

I'm confused. Isn't threshold the amount that EA has to reach and is shared by the company? You need to explain this a little more.

Glorelendil wrote:Yeah, I don't know if 6 is the right number, but I like the idea of a fixed (low) number because each stage could be named and described, sort of like the 4 degrees of shadow madness.

I like that and it could really help Loremasters in adding to the game's narrative.

1: Ill At Ease
2 - 3: A Storm Is Rising
4 - 5: The Shadow Descends
6: Revelation!

Oh, sorry, I re-used the word "threshold" with a totally separate meaning. In the above post it means the number they need to beat on all their own Success dice to avoid adding a point. Would need some terminology there.

... Also, what about the region type affecting the threshold or EA in some way? I like that in the RAW Free Lands differ to Shadow Lands and all those in between them.

Rich H wrote:... Also, what about the region type affecting the threshold or EA in some way? I like that in the RAW Free Lands differ to Shadow Lands and all those in between them.

Doh! Yeah, I forgot to incorporate that.

Hmmm....

It could vary the Hunt Threshold (e.g., Zone Rating / 2), but then we lose the elegance of the fixed value.

Glorelendil wrote:Oh, sorry, I re-used the word "threshold" with a totally separate meaning. In the above post it means the number they need to beat on all their own Success dice to avoid adding a point. Would need some terminology there.

Eye Awareness Limit or Eye Limit, or something to tie in with Eye Awareness?

Okay, so taking an example: A Ranger who has Valour and Wisdom of 4 each would need to get 5 or more on every one of their Success die if they rolled an EYE on their Feat die? Same stats for a High Elf and they would be looking at 6s? Is that right, if so, doesn't leave a whole lot of variation.

Rich H wrote:

Glorelendil wrote:Oh, sorry, I re-used the word "threshold" with a totally separate meaning. In the above post it means the number they need to beat on all their own Success dice to avoid adding a point. Would need some terminology there.

Eye Awareness Limit or Eye Limit, or something to tie in with Eye Awareness?

Okay, so taking an example: A Ranger who has Valour and Wisdom of 4 each would need to get 5 or more on every one of their Success die if they rolled an EYE on their Feat die? Same stats for a High Elf and they would be looking at 6s? Is that right, if so, doesn't leave a whole lot of variation.

Well, that's still more variation (for the Ranger) than the current system where it's 100% on every Eye. The probability starts off rather low (for a brand new Woodman using a skill with 2 pips in it, for example), and gradually reaches 100%.

Even in a party where they all need "higher than 6" (or the rule could be "equal to or higher than"), you still need 6 Eyes to be rolled, which is more than it would be currently.

As for naming, maybe something referring to "visibility" or "obviousness" (those concepts, not those specific words)

Rich H wrote: 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.

I think Rich has something here. I was thinking the same thing. I think ONLY rolling Eyes increases Awareness. How much that Awareness increases is based on the RAW factors:

Eye Awareness starts at 0
1) If a PC has less than 4 Wisdom or Valour, and no magical items, then when they roll an Eye, they add their culture score to Eye Awareness, that # being RAW (0 for Hobbits, 1 for Men/Dwarves/Elves, 2 for Dunedain, 3 for High Elves).
2) If a PC has Wisdom/Valour of 4 or more, then an Eye will add 1.
3) If a PC carries magical items, than an Eye result will add 1.
4) Add all these that are relevant when an Eye is rolled and increase Awareness by that amount.

So if you are a Woodman, with 4 Wisdom, carrying a Famous Axe, and roll an Eye, you will add 3 to Awareness (1 for being a Man, 1 for Wisdom score, 1 for the Axe).

These rules keep things very close to RAW, and are not more crunchy, and don't trigger automatic revelation episodes at the beginning of a journey (though they could be automatically triggered if you moved into a more shadowy place mid-journey).

These rules also make the rolling of an Eye more consequential, and therefore, more fun!

Well...online, I'm part of a 4 man party where I'm a Noldor and there's a Dunedain in the group. The RAW system keeps us from having revelations every session.

It seems like this system, we'd be having revelations twice a session or so.

And revelations are supposed to be scary. If they happen too often it's just 'ho hum, here we go again.'

Angelalex242 wrote:It seems like this system, we'd be having revelations twice a session or so.

Show what rule you think is doing that because the route I'm taking should reduce them and I'm not sure Glorelendil wants that either - so, you may be misreading something. As you have a habit of not quoting people it makes it difficult to interact sometimes and understand where you're coming from some of the time.