Hazards on Journeys, a variation

[Otaku-sempai]

Remember that the thing about the raft and Boating was just an example.
The point is allowing to change the skill being tested by invoking a Trait and proposing a new way of solving the situation.

Yes, but that was the element that I was discussing at that time. I still very much disagree with the suggestion made by Glorelendil of allowing Boating to substitute for Explore. I might allow that the knowledge of rivers and currents gained through Boating might be used to reduce the Target Number for the Explore roll (- TN 2) in order to find a place or way to cross a river.

I'm undecided about your Hazard Avoidance option, but it is an interesting idea.

[zedturtle]

To continue the example, I think invoking Boating in order to use Craft instead of Explore for a Hazard is perfectly within the rules (and doesn't actually need a house rule, since the regular rule on unusual skill uses already covers it). What I do think is that the Hazard system for large groups is a bit predictable... a better change might be to roll to find out what role was being challenged and a separate roll to find out the 'right' skill to use to conquer the Hazard. For example, the Scout might find themselves in a situation where Hunting is most appropriate. Then there could be a mechanism for the Scout to either roll Hunting, invoke a Trait to switch to a better skill, or maybe spend Hope to have the Hunter make the Hunting test.

The table for the tests might look like:

9,10,Gandalf: The affected role may utilise their best skill of the four for this Hazard.
7,8: Explore
5,6: Hunting
3,4: Awareness
1,2: Travel
EYE: The affected role must test their least favourable skill for this Hazard.

It has some awkwardness to it, but I think it'd alleviate some of the 'Hunter always makes Hunting tests' issue with Hazards in the RAW.

[Otaku-sempai]

To continue with the example of attempting to cross a river: I can see invoking Boating in order to cross. It's that I do not think that it should provide an auto-success in the crafting of a raft or simple boat. That should default to a Craft roll, perhaps with an appropriate modifier.

[Falenthal]

To continue with the example of attempting to cross a river: I can see invoking Boating in order to cross. It's that I do not think that it should provide an auto-success in the crafting of a raft or simple boat. That should default to a Craft roll, perhaps with an appropriate modifier.

My view on this is that Boating could be invoked to allow for testing Craft (but not to autosucceed), and thus build a raft if succesful.
Once the raft was constructed, the Boating trait could be invoked again to automatically cross the river.
Unless the LM determined that the river is too fast and furious, and an Athletics test was mandatory, with the Boating trait only being able to reduce the TN or the like.

[Falenthal]

To continue the example, I think invoking Boating in order to use Craft instead of Explore for a Hazard is perfectly within the rules (and doesn't actually need a house rule, since the regular rule on unusual skill uses already covers it).

Might be upon a delicate interpretation. But to be crystal clear, I think that this small house-rule/clarification is needed: the Hazard solving mechanic is strict, and a Hunting Hazard has to be addressed with a succesful Hunting test.
What I'm proposing is that a Trait might be invoked to change the skill tested.
This could be similar to a companion that wants to Rally Comrades in combat and proposes to use a Trait to change the skill tested from Song or Inspire to, say, Lore or Healing (Invoke Leechcraft to diagnose the companions wounds and bruises at a quick glance, and then test Healing: "Come on, boys! Your wounds are not as bad as they seem! Trust me, I know my stuff!"). Do you think this would be accepted by the RAW concerning Traits? Personally, I don't think so.

What I do think is that the Hazard system for large groups is a bit predictable... a better change might be to roll to find out what role was being challenged and a separate roll to find out the 'right' skill to use to conquer the Hazard. For example, the Scout might find themselves in a situation where Hunting is most appropriate. Then there could be a mechanism for the Scout to either roll Hunting, invoke a Trait to switch to a better skill, or maybe spend Hope to have the Hunter make the Hunting test.

Not saying it's a bad idea, but at least to me that's not appealing or doesn't solve the problem I have: that players don't have any choice in how to solve the Hazard AND that the flavour (theme) of the Hazard doesn't have any mechanical reflection or real importance.
With your proposed system, I see two issues:
1) Still, the player can't do anything to overcome the Hazard but roll. It introduces a higher unpredictability, but not freedom. The problem persists.

2) I think the Hunter likes being a Hunter, and using his skill. The Guide wants to be the best Traveller in the group, etc. If the skill tested is random, then the Travel roles are meaningless.

When I was reading the Hazards from Journeys & Maps, I kept saying to myself: "This are good ideas! But no matter how inspired the situation looks, the outcome at the game-table is the same: roll Awareness and get on." I want the players to listen carefully to the Hazard I'm telling them, because in my narration there could be stuff that allows them to be creative ("Instead of rolling Explore to see if the ruins are safe for the night, I use my Stonecraft trait and want to roll Search to see if the construction won't crumble on us.").

[Falenthal]

1) Allow the use of a Trait meaningful to the situation described to substitute the skill used for the test. It's a twist to the "invoke a Trait to allow a test when none was allowed" characteristic of Traits.
For example: The Scout finds a deep and somewhat rapid river ahead. He'd usually have to roll Explore to find an alternative route or (whatever nasty effect came up from the table). But the player invokes the Boating Trait and explains that he tries to build a raft out of the trees from the shore, using the Craft skill. The consequences of failure or success will be the same as if he used Explore.

A friend from the spanish forums, Tode, proposed a variant that's also interesting:
The role-related skill check has to be made, as the rules indicate.
But, if you fail it, the player has the chance to invoke a Trait to allow for an extra test of any skill that is meaningful to the situation.

Personally, I don't like this "second chance": if you decide to roll and fail, it's a failure. I prefer to give the chance to choose what to roll in the first place. But it's interesting if you don't want to lose the fact that a Guide has always to Travel, a Hunter has always to Hunt, etc. and the Hazards are the moments when this take place. Otherwise you might find yourself with a group where the Scout never Explores because he has some Traits that allow him to always change the tested skill (which needs not to be real bad, as it involves exploting the creativity of the players to adapt to random Hazards).