Underground Travel

[Glorelendil]

The majority of those would require the Look-out to be ahead of the Scout...

Or just beside the Scout, but not all of them. The Look-out might hear or feel the rumblings of an imminent cave-in or rock-fall before it happens. A colony of bats (or other Hazard) might emerge from a side-tunnel while the party is passing it. And other events could happen when the company is encamped. The Look-out might not be able to see far, but his/her other senses can compensate--especially if he/she is a Dwarf.

I'm still skeptical.

Detecting the rumblings of a cave-in is a pretty good use of Awareness, but is it something that the person assigned to the job of Lookout does while manning his post, or is it something that everybody in the party just does all the time? My view of hazards is that they aren't just things that happen on the journey that require one of four skills, they are things that happen while a companion is performing a given role. So while traveling aboveground I can see assigning one member to find good vantage points to keep a look-out, especially while camping/resting, and then hazards occur when that job requires a skill test. The reason only the Lookout gets to roll is that he's the one on Lookout duty, just like only the Hunter gets to roll to catch that stag because his companions didn't go hunting with him.

But if the companions are in a group underground and there are tremors rumbling through the earth, why would only the Lookout get to roll to notice?

Does that make sense?

(That said, I do like detecting rumblings as an All Companions hazard.)

As for the bat cave, I actually already have a hazard similar to that: in my version all the companions have to make Stealth tests to get through a cave without awaking thousands of bats. I keep changing my mind about the consequence, but they're not adversaries, more of a nuisance.

The part about the Dwarf....as I mentioned in the document I'm averse to giving Dwarves any special mechanical advantages that makes it feel like it's necessary to have one in the party, even if that makes total sense canonically.

[Otaku-sempai]

But if the companions are in a group underground and there are tremors rumbling through the earth, why would only the Lookout get to roll to notice?

Does that make sense?

(That said, I do like detecting rumblings as an All Companions hazard.)

Because the Look-out, due to his specific role, is paying special attention for anything out-of-the-ordinary or dangerous that might threaten the party. There are also times when the roles of the Look-out and the Scout could overlap. The Scout might miss a crack in the floor of a tunnel that presents a Hazard because it is just out of sight when he/she passes it. However, the Look-out might spot it before another member of the company can sprain an ankle or even fall into it (depending on the size of the crack).

As for the bat cave, I actually already have a hazard similar to that: in my version all the companions have to make Stealth tests to get through a cave without awaking thousands of bats. I keep changing my mind about the consequence, but they're not adversaries, more of a nuisance.

The bats might carry disease; by detecting them early enough, the Look-out might prevent anyone from being bitten. Don't go out of your way to rob the Look-out of events that let him fulfill his function. More underground Hazards:
- Poisonous gases.
- Flooding tunnels.
- Loose earth/stones.
- Creepy crawlies (vermin); they might be poisonous or parasitic, or or they might get into the food stores.

The part about the Dwarf....as I mentioned in the document I'm averse to giving Dwarves any special mechanical advantages that makes it feel like it's necessary to have one in the party, even if that makes total sense canonically.

Nonetheless, Dwarves do have some advantages over the other Free Peoples when underground and it would be foolish--and unfair to the players with Dwarvish characters--to completely ignore that, just as Wood-elves have some advantages when in a thick forest.

[Glorelendil]

Nonetheless, Dwarves do have some advantages over the other Free Peoples when underground and it would be foolish--and unfair to the players with Dwarvish characters--to completely ignore that, just as Wood-elves have some advantages when in a thick forest.

That's what the Tunneling trait is for; if they take that they can invoke it.

And what advantages do Wood-elves have in thick forest?

[Otaku-sempai]

And what advantages do Wood-elves have in thick forest?

Cultural Blessing: Folk of the Dusk
Specialities include (but not limited to): Elven-lore, Mirkwood-lore, Woodwright.
Background: Wild at Heart
Cultural Virtue: The Speakers
Cultural Reward: Woodland Bow

I'm sure that you could nit-pick some of that; and that's not to say that the Woodmen (for example) don't get some advantages of their own. However, one doesn't spend centuries and more in an environment without learning to appreciate it.

[Glorelendil]

And what advantages do Wood-elves have in thick forest?

Cultural Blessing: Folk of the Dusk
Specialities include (but not limited to): Elven-lore, Mirkwood-lore, Woodwright.
Background: Wild at Heart
Cultural Virtue: The Speakers
Cultural Reward: Woodland Bow

I'm sure that you could nit-pick some of that; and that's not to say that the Woodmen (for example) don't get some advantages of their own. However, one doesn't spend centuries and more in an environment without learning to appreciate it.

Oh, I see. I thought you meant that Wood-elves by default have an advantage in the woods. Sure, Elves have options to choose that give them benefits in the woods, and Dwarves have similar options that can be beneficial underground: Tunneling, Stone-craft, Durin's Way, Fire-making. But there's no extra rule in the Journeys section that says that Elves have lower TNs in Mirkwood, and likewise I don't think Dwarves should be singled out in a chapter about underground journeys.

I wouldn't include Backgrounds, though (e.g. "Life of Toil") because they don't provide any actual mechanical benefit.

[Glorelendil]

I did a massive rewrite yet again. Still the same general philosophy but greatly tweaked. I also stripped out (for now) most of the description and color to make it easier and faster to read.

New location is: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y79 ... sp=sharing

I updated the original post with a list of outstanding issues that I'd particularly like feedback on. Nomenclature is one big area.

[Rich H]

Once you get this finished we'll have underground and overground rules. To finish it off we'll need some Wombling free ones.

[Glorelendil]

Once you get this finished we'll have underground and overground rules. To finish it off we'll need some Wombling free ones.

That went over my head...

[Blubbo Baggins]

I like these! They are simpler and are closer to above ground travel...

A couple things:

1) I'm not sure about re-naming the roles. I think the roles should keep the same names, but the description of what is being done changes, and even the skill that is keyed to each role can change (Guide now rolls Riddle, for example).
- So before Delving, the rules could state that the players can discuss who wants to play which role underground.

2) When a Hazard is triggered, it triggers a series of a LOT of rolls!
- First you roll to see which role is affected
- Then the player rolls
- If they fail, then you roll the Fate die again to see what the consequence is
- Then for some of those consequences, you roll again

That seems like a few too many, in my opinion. At least for the TOR system, there aren't usually that many rolls required to get the end result. I think you could get rid of the Fate die table of consequences and have fixed consequences (for example, have two options per role, let the LM choose the more appropriate one). If you need then those consequences to be somewhat random (lose a skill die of End), that would be fine I think, but it would get rid of one more series of rolls. You might be able to cull it further.

3) I'm also not sure of some of the rules related to how many hours things take. It is a bit down into the nitty gritty and I'm not sure what the difference is - for example, if you're separated and it takes you 8 hours to be found, vs. 12 hours to be found, is one really worse than the other, mechanically?
There might be a ways to simplify this.

[Glorelendil]

I like these! They are simpler and are closer to above ground travel...
2) When a Hazard is triggered, it triggers a series of a LOT of rolls!
- First you roll to see which role is affected
- Then the player rolls
- If they fail, then you roll the Fate die again to see what the consequence is
- Then for some of those consequences, you roll again

That seems like a few too many, in my opinion. At least for the TOR system, there aren't usually that many rolls required to get the end result.

Unless I'm massively misunderstanding something, that's exactly how Hazards work in RAW:
1) You roll a Feat die to see who is affected
2) You roll a Feat die to see what the Hazard is (defined by what the penalty is for failing)
3) The person affected rolls their appropriate skills (Travel for Guides, etc.)
4) In some cases you then roll a Success die to determine how much endurance is lost, or whatever

So I was trying to exactly parallel that system, but with some different tables & roles.

3) I'm also not sure of some of the rules related to how many hours things take. It is a bit down into the nitty gritty and I'm not sure what the difference is - for example, if you're separated and it takes you 8 hours to be found, vs. 12 hours to be found, is one really worse than the other, mechanically?
There might be a ways to simplify this.

Yeah I don't love the bookkeeping, either. I would love to keep the granularity to the Day level, but struggled to make that "work" numerically. Maybe there's a way I can aggregate the hours into a probability. I'll keep looking at it.

Curious what other people think about role names. I don't like the names I have, but I also find it awkward to call the guy who fixes bridges and reads stonework the "Lookout" or "Huntsman".

Thank you for feedback! Keep it coming?